On a serious note, what are the providers out there that can do a decent secondary dns hosting service?. looks like a lot of people stopped offering this service for bulk amount of domains at reasonable price. Let's say (100K domains)
mehmet On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote: > > In message <CAGFn2k2+8zq8hjDQFwSaZ+s2Z6DTZOCWD_nnW+_4e0mgP7J5Mw@ > mail.gmail.com> > , Rubens Kuhl writes: > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Filip Hruska <f...@fhrnet.eu> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > If you are going the IaaS route, definitely checkout KnotDNS project. > > > According to their benchmarks [1], it does much better than other DNS > > > servers in about every workload. > > > > > > > > The problem with KnotDNS/Yadifa/NSD is that they are too optimized for > > servers with a small number of zones containing large numbers of records, > > usually delegation-only. That is the use of TLD registries, but not the > use > > case of registrars... > > > > ... all those 3 are getting better in supporting large number of zones > with > > small number of records, but the canonical solution in that space is > Power > > DNS. Things that TLDs usually don't like, SQL-backend for instance, makes > > perfect sense for this use case. > > > > Note that the only workload they tested is serving the root zone, not > > multiple number of zones with variable number of RR-sets... so aligning > the > > testing with the actual use case is crucial to make good decisions. > > > > What I strongly support, though, is getting out of the BIND comfort zone. > > Named will support millions of zones and they don't need to be > listed in named.conf. BIND 9.11 supports catalog zone which is a > meta zone which says what zones the server should configure itself > for and where to transfer those zones from, etc. > > Mark > -- > Mark Andrews, ISC > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org >
