From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 9 19:06:18 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2652416A4CE for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 19:06:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.de [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 27B0043D45 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 19:06:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from krylon@gmx.net) Received: (qmail 17823 invoked by uid 65534); 9 Nov 2004 19:06:16 -0000 Received: from i53875AA7.versanet.de (EHLO [192.168.0.13]) (83.135.90.167) by mail.gmx.net (mp006) with SMTP; 09 Nov 2004 20:06:16 +0100 X-Authenticated: #685629 Message-ID: <41911526.1000709@gmx.net> Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:06:14 +0100 From: Benjamin Walkenhorst User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (X11/20041025) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Danny MacMillan References: <00e101c4c67d$19b32900$19c8a8c0@loriandsmith> <20041109174553.GA807@procyon.nekulturny.org> In-Reply-To: <20041109174553.GA807@procyon.nekulturny.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: Andrew Smith cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Caching DNS Server? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 19:06:18 -0000 Danny MacMillan wrote: >No doubt BIND can do this ... but I find djbdns much easier to configure. > > I have never tried out djbdns, so I cannot say for myself, and I also understand that apparently djbdns has caused similarly intense discussions as KDE-vs-GNOME or vi-vs-emacs; so I want to make clear that I am not ranting about djbdns. But I don't really find BIND hard to configure as a caching nameserver. I run BIND on my NetBSD machine doing exactly that, and the caching part took no modification to the default configuration to work. On the other hand, like I said, I haven't worked with djbdns so far - from what I know it seems to be worth trying. I'm just a lazy person, so I never bothered trying when I had BIND installed already. =) And since I've been working on a BIND4-to-BIND9-migration for the recent months I got kind of used to it. Still, I really like the idea of having seperate servers for resolving recursive queries and for hosting zones, since this affects both security and performance. Nominum, the company that wrote BIND9, offers a commercial, closed-source nameserver as well, that also uses different servers for caching and hosting authoritative zon data. Then again, performance shouldn't differ for home use. Kind regards, Benjamin