New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
AWS does something similar for half the price (for IP at least)
https://aws.amazon.com/ko/global-accelerator/pricing/
We're using StackPath's Edge VMs as part of our DNS system.
It has a really nice routing and latency, but the pricing is incredibly high if you want to take VMs globally.
It's a bit of a hassle to manage since you can only control a full set of VMs and adding a new location destroys all existing VMs, but other than that if you just want the best performance without maintaining your own anycast it's the place to go I think. It's a really nice platform
Their DNS is quite expensive considering the 2M queries included, and 5$/1M after that.
I also came to use 25M queries and have to pay 125$ for just 23 domains.
Now I'm with ClouDNS paying 5$ for the same basically
We are also looking at it for our DNS.
That's what I thought too, which is why our team is reviewing if it will be more cost effective on using their Edge VM with Anycast than their Managed DNS.
Interesting, I will check on this too.
I think it's a perfect use-case for DNS. Especially if you use their Docker containers or automate everything, it allows you to scale like crazy around the world with just a few clicks. They also allow you to do health checks on the instances itself (set up via the API only) so if one VM fails traffic will automatically get routed elsewhere.
Perhaps combine it with AWS for redundancy and you can simply focus on the product instead of maintaining your own system. But it will cost you
a 2-core global setup ends up at around $1400.
If that's too much maybe have a look at Vultr, they have quite a good global coverage and do BGP sessions so you can build your own 16 PoP anycast network for as little as around $150 which also includes renting a block of IPs.
If it's only for DNS, what's wrong with route 53? Iirc you can do health checks, load balancing, geodns, etc. and you can customize almost everything via API?
I (potentially incorrectly) assumed the op wants to build a DNS service or needs a very large amount of queries at which point Route 53 becomes stupidly expensive, but I agree it makes no sense building your own cluster unless you do billions of DNS requests per month or have some more specific requirements.
Also the geodns at route53 sucks big time by the way
Just trying to understand - Wouldn't cloudflare work?
Sure, but the thread was about StackPath, I just shared our experience with them
CloudFlare would do just fine too.
We already tried Cloudflare, DNSmadeeasy, Route53 and others. The reason we build our own DNS system is to make it dead simple for clients and of course paying per thousand queries is way more expensive. Clients do not understand DNS and 99% of them does not pay for DNS hosting. We provide managed vps/dedi (no shared hosting). Cutting the support tickets as much as possible, as many as possible makes our expense very low and our time more productive. Our goal is - simple, managed and fast web services. Most of our clients only know how to set the nameservers from the domain registrar.
Here's our experience
1. Using Route53, Cloudflare, DNSmadeeasy and others we have to maintain the API. So in result we keep track of changes and keep updating on our side.
2. Most of our clients use too many queries (eg. "social sites") which leads to more expense.
Here's our reasons for doing our own DNS
1. We provide free DNS hosting to our clients.
2. We need reliable infrastructure, and a backup infra.
3. We also have other services which needs anycast. (smtp, status pages, static file hosting, affiliate system, newsletter system, anti-spam).