[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Again ... Re: security.debian.org

> > > On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 10:32 -0700, Raquel wrote:
> > > > This is happening again.  IP #:

> > On Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 13:44:40 -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> > > Yep, I saw it too a bit earlier.  :-(
> > > 
> > > I wonder if the server is under high load or DDoS attack?

> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 19:48:29 +0200
> Martin Zobel-Helas <zobel@ftbfs.de> wrote:
> > Yesterday evening, the openoffice.org DSA seems have to DDoSed
> > security.d.o :)

On 29.03.07 10:55, Raquel wrote:
> Didn't this happen a few months (maybe a year ago?) back with
> another upgrade, where it caused problems with a security server?

yes, it happened with Xfree86 upgrade. 2 new servers were then introduced in
order to prevent this problem from re-appearing.

However this does not _seem_ to be enough, and I guess it's due to "feature"
of glibc, that sorts IP addresses from numerically lowest one to numerically
highest one (so it spoils attempts for DNS load-balancing), so if any program
is the order of addresses returned via gethostbyname() or getnameinfo(), it
tries them always in the following order:

% getent hosts security.debian.org security.debian.org  security.debian.org security.debian.org

so no wonder _if_ is loaded more than other servers.
many times I have to re-try update/upgrade to ask other servers and seems to be the slowest for me.

I tried to discuss this "feature" in debian-glibc list
but first time I did not guess the right problem, then I gave up "solving"
this issue...

I hope someone will confirm or deny this... I don't know how are debian
security servers loaded... I only know that is usually very
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Honk if you love peace and quiet. 

Reply to: