Community Forums Today's Posts     Member List     Archive    
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    20

    Lightbulb [Suggestion] TS DNS

    Hi all

    I've discovered ts DNS with SRV records for my domain.
    I've tried to use this to make a fallback to a backup server

    I've set my DNS records to :
    Code:
    _ts3._udp.myguild.com   SRV   10 0 9987   145.156.10.101
    _ts3._udp.muguild.com   SRV   20 0 9987   145.156.10.102
    I've expected that if the first server (145.156.10.101) doesn't respond, the client will try to connect using the second server (145.156.10.102)
    but it doesn't happened.

    Do i had a mistake within my configuration ?
    Or is it a lack form the TS3 client ?
    Last edited by Goof FR; 25-01-2013 at 00:44.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The 3rd dimension
    Posts
    780
    I had an issue with my records too, turned out I needed a terminating "." eg:

    _ts3._udp.myguild.com.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    20
    In fact for me I haven't to add the domain name at the end.
    I don't know if it's specific to my DNS provider.

    Code:
    ts3       300 IN A      123.456.789.012
    ts3 300 IN AAAA 2001:610:240:22::c100:68b
    _ts3._udp    300 IN SRV    10 0 9988    ts3
    (300 is 5 minutes TTL)

    it mean that for a domain (myGuild.org) the connection can be make with ts3server://myGuild.org.
    The DNS resolve _ts3._udp.myGuild.org get a list of record to looking for.
    Here it will fall back to resolve ts3.myGuild.org.
    If the request is V6 compatible it will return [2001:610:240:22::c100:68b]:9988
    If the request is V4 it will return 123.456.789.012:9988

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    4,207
    If you are using multiple TSDNS SRV Records the client will pick one of those based on the priority and weight to query for the real IP, if the chosen TSDNS server doesn't reply, the client will fall back to using the IP the DNS name resolves to. It will not try another TSDNS server in order to avoid unnecessarily long time spent waiting for TSDNS responses which would delay the connection.
    If you are using multiple TS3 SRV Records the same thing happens, it will pick one and try to connect to the ip it points to, if that connection fails it fails, the client won't try the other records automatically.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    20
    Ok

    This would have been useful for a failover service.

    I don't know how is performed the DNS query by TS.
    But nslookup return the two IP address anyway.

    Code:
    goof@MySERVER:~$ nslookup
    > set type=SRV
    > _ts3._udp.ts3.domain.com
    Server:         91.110.X.Y
    Address:        91.110.X.Y
    
    Non-authoritative answer:
    _ts3._udp.ts3.domain.com    service = 10 0 9988 ip.ts3.domain.com
    _ts3._udp.ts3.domain.com    service = 20 0 11440 ip.ts3.backup.domain.com
    
    Authoritative answers can be found from:
    ip.ts3.domain.com        internet address = 46.105.X.Y
    ip.ts3.backup.domain.com internet address = 91.110.X.Y

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    If you are using multiple TS3 SRV Records the same thing happens, it will pick one and try to connect to the ip it points to, if that connection fails it fails, the client won't try the other records automatically.
    If the client won't try the other records automatically, what is the advantage that SRV records hold over TSDNS?
    Why would someone prefer to use SRV records over TSDNS?

    I spent about 4 hours researching everything I could find about TS3 and the support of SRV records. Then I spent another 8 hours modifying SRV records trying to get TS to automatically failover to a backup server.

    Nowhere that I could find (except this thread) does it say, "the TS client ignores the priority and weight of SRV records and provides no failover options".

    This is severely disappointing.
    Are there any plans to include full support for SRV records? By full support, I mean fully utilizing the entire reason SRV records have priority and weight values... instead of completely ignoring them..

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    The 3rd dimension
    Posts
    780
    Teamspeak treats SRV records very weirdly. Many times people connect to my server that I rent and fail to connect due to a failure to resolve the name. I think it is the amount of time allocated to resolving various records. Sometimes they need to connect 2 or even 3 times to get a connection.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    144
    Technically your weight value should add up to 100 for same level priorities. Not that it is a problem most of the time, and for solo records the client should use it if no other equal priority records exist.

    I would like to add my support for a full implementation of SRV records. As the SRV records are returned all at once the teamspeak server will know how many times it can try before it has to failover. Let administrators determine how long they want the client to poll servers to find a connection to their teamspeak servers.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1
    If the client would take SRV record priority and weight into consideration, as the spec intends, it would be very easy to implement backup servers, and my gaming community could certainly use a better uptime.
    Last edited by John308; 28-06-2013 at 01:29.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    4,207
    Quote Originally Posted by webjocky View Post
    If the client won't try the other records automatically, what is the advantage that SRV records hold over TSDNS?
    Why would someone prefer to use SRV records over TSDNS?
    Not having to run a separate process that can fail.

    Quote Originally Posted by webjocky View Post
    Nowhere that I could find (except this thread) does it say, "the TS client ignores the priority and weight of SRV records and provides no failover options".
    Because that's not true, the client does not ignore the priority and weight. It uses the highest priority servers and then one selected according to the weight. It just doesn't use another one when the connection fails.
    No support by PM, please use the forums. (unless a private message was explicitly requested by a TeamSpeak Staff Member)
    If a PM was requested and you do send one, be sure to include a link to the thread in question in the body of your message.
    Any private message, that was not requested and is not of sensitive / private nature, may get deleted without being read! (seriously... enough is enough)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    the client does not ignore the priority and weight. It uses the highest priority servers and then one selected according to the weight.
    If what you describe is how the client is supposed to handle SRV records, then something is wrong somewhere. Below you'll find the SRV record setup I'm referring to:
    Code:
    C:\>nslookup
    Default Server:  google-public-dns-a.google.com
    Address:  8.8.8.8
    
    > set type=srv
    > _ts3._udp.mydomain.com
    Server:  google-public-dns-a.google.com
    Address:  8.8.8.8
    
    Non-authoritative answer:
    _ts3._udp.mydomain.com  SRV service location:
              priority       = 1
              weight         = 100
              port           = 9987
              svr hostname   = ts.mydomain.com
    
    _ts3._udp.mydomain.com  SRV service location:
              priority       = 2
              weight         = 100
              port           = 9987
              svr hostname   = tsbackup1.mydomain.com
    
    _ts3._udp.mydomain.com  SRV service location:
              priority       = 3
              weight         = 100
              port           = 9987
              svr hostname   = tsbackup2.mydomain.com
    >
    Turns out the client skips my Priority 1 server and goes straight for the Priority 2 server - which was off at the time of testing - and failed to connect. I then modified the SRV records, waited until they updated, cleared my DNS cache, launched the client and tried the following to see if it would work correctly:

    Code:
    C:\>nslookup
    Default Server:  google-public-dns-a.google.com
    Address:  8.8.8.8
    
    > set type=srv
    > _ts3._udp.mydomain.com
    Server:  google-public-dns-a.google.com
    Address:  8.8.8.8
    
    Non-authoritative answer:
    _ts3._udp.mydomain.com  SRV service location:
              priority       = 1
              weight         = 100
              port           = 9987
              svr hostname   = ts.mydomain.com
    
    _ts3._udp.mydomain.com  SRV service location:
              priority       = 1
              weight         = 99
              port           = 9987
              svr hostname   = tsbackup1.mydomain.com
    
    _ts3._udp.mydomain.com  SRV service location:
              priority       = 1
              weight         = 98
              port           = 9987
              svr hostname   = tsbackup2.mydomain.com
    >
    Exact same result. The client logs show a connection attempt to tsbackup1.mydomain.com.
    Given your explanation of SRV record choice the client should make, I should be connecting to ts.mydomain.com without any issues.
    Am I doing something wrong here?

    Additionally, are there any plans to implement reconnection attempts when multiple SRV records exist? If not, can we change that?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Europe/Czech Rep.
    Posts
    1,488
    Quote Originally Posted by John308 View Post
    If the client would take SRV record priority and weight into consideration, as the spec intends, it would be very easy to implement backup servers, and my gaming community could certainly use a better uptime.
    Better uptime? What the heck are you doing with your teamspeak3 server? Can't you run it 24/7?

    back to topic, SRV was added to teamspeak 3 in order to support something that was already made in DNS system, which TeamSpeak 3 vendor re-invented with their TSDNS service.
    longer story: DNS already has High Aviability since mostly anyone domain is on at least 3 servers, so resolving problem shouldn't happen even if one is down. It has build replication between servers so you only have to change it on one location and it get spread over.

    Now TSDNS is going in way, that it depends on DNS service to know teamspeak.com IP where it looks for TSDNS responces, and as well depends on DNS service to know voice.teamspeak.com IP where it looks for TSDNS responces, and after all that it decides where to connect. Now to change anything you have to edit TSDNS records on both servers either manualy or using 3rd party tool.

    So mainly why it was requested here on forums from users, was this reasoning. We don't want to run another useless telnet service. And besides SRV was made for different service names. That being said you don't have to have web-presentation on same address or you could have your voice.teamspeak.com pointing to entirely different IP with website.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomas View Post
    Better uptime? What the heck are you doing with your teamspeak3 server? Can't you run it 24/7?
    If you don't have something constructive (positive or negative) to add to the conversation, please refrain from commenting. Thanks.

    The problem is ISP availability smarty pants. The facilities that our primary TS server is located in only has one ISP available in the area that can sustain the bandwidth needed for 100+ users. Our secondary (backup) TeamSpeak server runs on a different ISP and is located in a separate facility.

    Our main ISP went down last week when an electrical transformer blew up. It was down for over 5 hours during our peak usage time.
    It's highly unlikely that both ISP's will experience downtime at the same time.

    Trust me, if I didn't have an issue with the way SRV records are handled, and a more elegant handling of them wouldn't solve our need for automatic fail over, I wouldn't be here trying to find resolve.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomas View Post
    back to topic, SRV was added to teamspeak 3 in order to support something that was already made in DNS system, which TeamSpeak 3 vendor re-invented with their TSDNS service.
    longer story: DNS already has High Aviability since mostly anyone domain is on at least 3 servers, so resolving problem shouldn't happen even if one is down. It has build replication between servers so you only have to change it on one location and it get spread over.
    You can pretty much bet that anyone with a decent amount of knowledge of how/why an SRV record exists already has a pretty good grasp of DNS.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomas View Post
    Now TSDNS is going in way, that it depends on DNS service to know teamspeak.com IP where it looks for TSDNS responces, and as well depends on DNS service to know voice.teamspeak.com IP where it looks for TSDNS responces, and after all that it decides where to connect. Now to change anything you have to edit TSDNS records on both servers either manualy or using 3rd party tool.
    Like Chris said already:
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Not having to run a separate process that can fail.
    TSDNS is a 3rd party service that can fail. I have no control over its facilities or server setup. I therefore cannot rely on it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomas View Post
    So mainly why it was requested here on forums from users, was this reasoning. We don't want to run another useless telnet service. And besides SRV was made for different service names. That being said you don't have to have web-presentation on same address or you could have your voice.teamspeak.com pointing to entirely different IP with website.
    Can somebody translate this for me?
    From the little I can comprehend out of this broken English gibberish, you're trying to say something about a website being hosted on the same something or other - nope I give up. Doesn't make any sense.

    There is no reason you can't host SRV records and a website on the same domain. They are neither mutually exclusive nor symbiotic. That said, I'm not hosting the website & the TS server on the same physical server anyway.
    Last edited by webjocky; 30-06-2013 at 01:03. Reason: clarification

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Europe/Czech Rep.
    Posts
    1,488
    Quote Originally Posted by webjocky View Post
    If you don't have something constructive (positive or negative) to add to the conversation, please refrain from commenting. Thanks.
    So what is that post of yours adding to this topic(TSDNS implementation)? Anger? No consideration for missing information from your end? etc..

    Isn't there better provider?

    Quote Originally Posted by webjocky View Post
    ...you're trying to say something about a website being hosted on the same something or other - nope I give up. Doesn't make any sense.
    Yeach oke, that was missing enter to separate two things from each other. In last sentence, I was only talking about option that if for example there is a clan with rented teamspeak3 server and webhosting plan, they can have ts3.clan.com with website on it(ts3viewer, messages?), and at same time use same name with SRV to point to rented ts3 server IP address.

    to John: no idea what you mean.

    We are really going offTopic with this. If you want to respond because I am seriously wrong somewhere use PM's.
    Last edited by Tomas; 30-06-2013 at 13:48. Reason: shorting

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomas View Post
    So what is that post of yours adding to this topic(TSDNS implementation)? Anger? No consideration for missing information from your end? etc..
    • Anger? Not at all. If I were angry, I'd use all kinds of inappropriate language. That's unprofessional. However I am a bit put off that you are not even capable of reading the topic and understanding that the original post in this thread is not about TSDNS, but TS, DNS, and SRV records specifically. You're wasting my time and adding junk to the thread that doesn't need to be here.
    • No consideration for missing information from your end?Would you be so kind as to not waste more time by placing some sort of artificial blame on me for not providing enough information to the developer of this software? Instead, you could just reference the information that I am so willingly withholding.
      In order to troubleshoot or fully understand exactly what problem I am experiencing, why I am experiencing the problem, and what the solution might be, I have given all technical and high level details needed at this point in the conversation.
    • etc.. Sorry, can't read your mind. I have no idea what else you're trying to pile on as to why I'm in the wrong here. Quite frankly, I'm just an end user trying to come up with a backup plan for a voice chat server for when the only ISP available in the area goes down. What's wrong with that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomas View Post
    Isn't there better provider?
    Again, by not fully reading what I'm typing, you're wasting my time and adding more broken English to decipher that is not conducive to moving the discussion forward in any meaningful way. I already stated, "The facilities that our primary TS server is located in only has one ISP available in the area that can sustain the bandwidth needed for 100+ users."
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomas View Post
    Yeach oke, that was missing enter to separate two things from each other. In last sentence, I was only talking about option that if for example there is a clan with rented teamspeak3 server and webhosting plan, they can have ts3.clan.com with website on it(ts3viewer, messages?), and at same time use same name with SRV to point to rented ts3 server IP address.
    Thanks for clarifying, but THAT was off topic completely.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomas View Post
    We are really going offTopic with this. If you want to respond because I am seriously wrong somewhere use PM's.
    I'd much rather everyone else have the opportunity to read the entirety of what I'm trying to convey so that others like yourself are not confused about what this topic was created for. Besides, this entire post is here to clarify what the topic actually is... and the topic itself cannot, by definition, be off topic.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. [Resolved] [Suggestion] new voice codec suggestion "Opus"
    By DGMurdockIII in forum Suggestions and Feedback
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-12-2012, 08:35
  2. Suggestion
    By enemil in forum [TeamSpeak 2] General Questions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-11-2004, 20:00
  3. Suggestion For TS3
    By Floppy_Hunter in forum [TeamSpeak 2] General Questions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-11-2004, 17:10

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •