Fritz Borgstedt > >While I'll agree that a local dns server will always be fastest > > > That is simply not true. > A local DNS has to ask the feeders, when it is not in cache. > Big public DNS with huge caches can be very fast. > But I really wonder about the way this is discussed here. > People refuse to use the Benchmark test and prove their "how > they feel" > statement with their own test. Amazing.
After writing that, I knew I should have worded it differently, "While I'll agree that a local dns server can be faster (provided it has already cached the dns/ip info)". But anyways... For normal website browsing, I would say that a local dns server is comparable to a public dns option given that people browse the same websites most of the time. I do remember back in the day when people were having problems with their dns lookups taking so long because their dns servers were running on Pentium 166 machines with 128MB RAM and thus the dns option was added to ASSP. Being that emails are coming from so many more different locations than web browsing, a local dns server can definitely benefit from a public dns cache. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Assp-test mailing list Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
