[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A contrary view from the trenches:

Around a year ago we tested DJB dnscache as the recursive DNS server
in a high-volume ISP environment - mostly because we were not happy
with BIND 9 performance at the time. Our conclusions were:

- dnscache used *more* CPU than BIND 9 in our environment, effectively
ruling it out

It'd be interesting to find the actual causes for this. Did you by chance consult the djbdns mailing list for hints?


- Not possible to get dnscache to listen to more than one IP address
unless you introduce hacks/patches

It's easy enough to setup as many instances of dnscache as you have IP addresses and point them all at one central dnscache (typically on a loopback address). Assuming you've already setup the central dnscache, you need to execute the following commands:


  # dnscache-conf Gdnscache Ddnslog /etc/dnscacheX a.b.c.d
  # echo 127.0.0.1 > /etc/dnscacheX/root/servers/\@
  # echo 1 > /etc/dnscacheX/env/FORWARDONLY
  # touch /etc/dnscacheX/root/ip/a.b.c
  # ln -s /etc/dnscacheX /service

While I agree that it's more work than simply adding one line to a config file, in effect you've got no more than two variables: IP adress, netmask (which I happily assumed to be 255.255.255.0 above). It's trivial to write a script to handle this situation in a one-liner.

Personally, I also like the added flexibility that this approach gives you.

- Weird failures reported from users

Did you actually investigate any of these?

- Annoying installation process with lots of small programs that we
don't want or need

I found the installation process to be relatively straightforward, if a little awkward (as some of DJB's habits are). As for the 'lots of small programs' you don't want or need, I don't see the point. If you install BIND, you get a monolithic binary whereas djbdns splits the functionality into separate programs. Most people only use a fraction of the code in BIND, would you argue that its binary is too large?


[snip]
version that worked well for us (but still too low performance). We
finally switched to Nominum CNS (two servers) and one BIND 9 server
as backup. We really like Nominum CNS, and we're happy.

I've read that Nominum CNS provides good performance. Unfortunately (in my book), it's not Open Source, though.


Cheers,
Tobias

Reply via email to