From owner-freebsd-chat  Wed Nov 26 19:17:45 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA29418
          for chat-outgoing; Wed, 26 Nov 1997 19:17:45 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from implode.root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA29386
          for <chat@hub.freebsd.org>; Wed, 26 Nov 1997 19:17:35 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from root@implode.root.com)
Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by implode.root.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA25463;
	Wed, 26 Nov 1997 19:20:32 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199711270320.TAA25463@implode.root.com>
To: Eivind Eklund <perhaps@yes.no>
cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, chat@hub.freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD.ORG name servers (was: Re: major push by spammers?) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 27 Nov 1997 03:40:06 +0100."
             <199711270240.DAA07910@bitbox.follo.net> 
From: David Greenman <dg@root.com>
Reply-To: dg@root.com
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 19:20:32 -0800
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

>> 
>> Hmmm.  What would be a better code if one simply wished to toss it away?
>> 
>> And I wonder if running a caching named on mail.freebsd.org wouldn't
>> perhaps be a good idea, if only to avoid the scenario of temporary DNS
>> outtages.  Would it even help?
>
>Talking of FreeBSD.ORG nameservers - all three of them lie on the
>wrong side of MAE-east as seen from me :-( This will e.g. sometimes
>block me from reaching cvsup.no.freebsd.org , even though I
>get to the actual IP address in approx 20ms.
>
>Is there any particular reason to not run a secondary in some other
>location(s), more netwise dispersed?  I can run a secondary here if it
>is of interest - it take me about 3 minutes to set one up.  (About 100
>to 150 ms from the major parts of the US and Europe.  Approx 3 hours
>line downtime during the last year).

   The main problem is finding someone dedicated enough to stick with it
for the next couple of years. In the past, every time I've set up an out
of USA secondary, it lasted for less than 6 months before it went away. I
really hate dealing with the InterNIC and prefer to make as few changes
to this as possible. ns.gnome.co.uk is a secondary that is in the freebsd.org
zone file, but hasn't yet been made a listed secondary with the root
nameservers...I plan to change that at some point.
   freebsd-chat is the wrong forum to be discussing this.

-DG

David Greenman
Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project