• 3 Posts
  • 653 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 7th, 2023

help-circle



  • Yes, that’s called Round-Robin Load Balancing.

    To get more specific, your DNS provider spins up a large number of DNS resolvers out in the world on a CDN network that resolves clients to the most geographically convenient server(s) at any point in time based on the GeoIP info of your public IP.

    Once you resolve one set of addresses at any given time, it caches your request, so the next time you ask these DNS servers for something you’ll get a response right back from them as fast as possible.

    You constantly checking is just going to show this. It’s quite normal.



  • I might be misunderstanding, but you’re checking what exactly for DNS leaks?

    If the IPs are changing, that’s not uncommon. The HOST changing would be though, like if you swapped from what you expected back to Comcast or something.

    You need to get better control of your local network and not have to be paranoid about this. Static reservations for long lived hosts, your router should have a setting to override and prevent internal hosts (like guests) from sending OoB DNS requests, and any sort of VPS stack should as well.




    1. Get some sort of resource monitor running on the machine to collect timeseries data about your procs, preferably sent to another machine. Prometheus is simple enough, but SigNoz and Outrace are like DataDog alternatives if you want to go there.
    2. Identify what’s running out of control. Check CPU and Memory (most likely a memory leak)
    3. Check logs to see if something is obviously wrong
    4. Look and see if there is an update for whatever the proc is that addresses this issue
    5. If it’s a systems process, set proper limits

    In general, it’s not an out of control CPU that’s going to halt your machine, it’s memory loss. If you have an out of control process taking too much memory, it should get OOMkilled by the kernel, but if you don’t have proper swap configured, and not enough memory, it may not have time to successfully prevent the machine from running out of memory and halting.




  • Well, firstly, it’s not what Tailscale is meant for. I’m getting downvoted by the people using the wrong tool for the wrong job.

    You don’t install a VPN on all your local machines just to talk to each other. That’s insane. You especially don’t install one that, while misconfigured, is sending all of its traffic OUTSIDE of your local network, then back in. This is what Tailscale on a number of local machines will do by default.

    The way Tailscale works is by installing a Wireguard client on a machine. It then checks in with their DERP servers to figure out it’s network situation (behind NAT, peers in the network, routing tables…etc). So when you have more than one client on the Tailscale network, it automagically assumes some things, the first being that these two machines dont have a more direct route to talk to each other.

    So then it will attempt to bridge a path between the DERP server each client is checked into, and pass traffic that way. Which means you then have two machines on the same local network sending traffic OUTSIDE of that network, then back in to complete a VPN network.

    This is stupid.

    You setup multiple different networks and use exit nodes to bridge two networks together with Tailscale. That’s the entire point. This means setting up routes to let the orchestration layer know that a set of certain machines exist in the same network, and shouldn’t use Tailscale to communicate with each other. Then it will only be using routes for REMOTE networks, where other clients exist, to pass traffic over the Tailscale network.

    May I ask what you were planning on doing with Tailscale? I can point you in the right direction.