Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 57672 invoked from network); 1 Sep 2010 22:24:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 1 Sep 2010 22:24:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 48934 invoked by uid 500); 1 Sep 2010 22:24:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 48915 invoked by uid 500); 1 Sep 2010 22:24:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 48907 invoked by uid 99); 1 Sep 2010 22:24:26 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 22:24:26 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [74.125.82.44] (HELO mail-ww0-f44.google.com) (74.125.82.44) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 22:24:21 +0000 Received: by wwj40 with SMTP id 40so656170wwj.25 for ; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:24:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.165.77 with SMTP id d55mr8516419wel.23.1283379840024; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 15:24:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.3.129 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 15:23:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C7ED14C.7020109@qualcomm.com> References: <20100901162612.GA5944@alcatel-lucent.com> <4C7EB31C.2090609@qualcomm.com> <4C7ECC38.1000408@qualcomm.com> <4C7ED14C.7020109@qualcomm.com> From: Benjamin Black Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 15:23:39 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Cassandra on AWS across Regions To: Andres March Cc: "user@cassandra.apache.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Andres March wrote: > I thought you might say that.=A0 Is there some reason to gossip IP addres= ses > vs hostnames?=A0 I thought that layer of indirection could be useful in m= ore > than just this use case. > The trade-off for that flexibility is that nodes are now dependent on name resolution during normal operation, rather than only at startup. The opportunities for horribly confusing failure scenarios are numerous and frightening. Other than NAT (which can clearly be dealt with without gossiping hostnames), what do you think this would enable? b