At 02:25 PM 1/8/02 +0100, you wrote: > Hello Julian, > > > Again, though, it's perfectly valid to use your ISP's server in a > caching mode > > if you want local caching, but want to offload the searching job from > your own > > machine. > > Using forwarding instead of querying the root servers directly has one more >advantage that you forget to mention: The load on the root servers. If you >*do* want to build a local cache it is much cheaper on the root servers to >use >your ISP's DNS server as a forwarder, because you are likely to find the >answer to your query already in it's cache. If you don't want to build a >local >cache then of course it is pointless to set up named anyway, and just rely on >resolv.conf. >
Very interesting point, about the root servers issue, and truthfully I hadn't even considered it (because when I started the process I didn't know I'd be talking to them). Thinking "aloud" here, your point has great validity for the Internet as a whole. The load on root servers would be enormously reduced if local LANs ran a central local DNS server in a forwarding configuration to their ISP. Wow! Thanks for enlightening me! > > But my view is that if you have a single DNS server, and are contemplating > > forwarding because the server can't handle the load, then you don't > need the > > DNS server in the first place. > > Once again, it's not so much the load on your local DNS server as well > as the >fact that if you don't use the forwarders you will be talking to the root >servers all the time. Although I *am* doing that in my setup (unreliable >ISP's >DNS server), it is not recommended practice for small LAN's. Maybe the >"forward" statement was not originally intended for this, but it is useful in >a small LAN setup to lighten the load on the root servers. Yes indeed, I totally agree :-) Thanks for giving me that insight! > > > You mean you don't need to enter "127.0.0.1" in resolv.conf? > > > > No I don't. I was referring to the ISP's numbers. > > > > >I would assume > > >you need to point the IP stack to the (locally running) DNS server to > use it > > >to resolve names... > > > > I would think that too. But I don't know that the link to localhost isn't > > implicit - it may be. My resolv.conf doesn't have 127.0.0.1 in it. > > Do you mean to say that your resolv.conf is empty? Or is the machine > running >named still talking to your ISP's DNS server when doing it's own queries? >(The >machine is serving others, but not itself?) Well at this specific moment in time my resolv.conf holds the names of my ISP's servers, but I'm not done tinkering yet. I'm only setting up a DNS server for the learning experience. I use the Linux box as a workstation (or should I say training center ? ;-> ). When I get brave I'll remove the DNS listings from resolv.conf, leaving only the local machine fqdn, and see how it works. I think, at the end of all this, I'll follow your suggestion and set up a forwarding DNS server to my ISP - I'm sure this is the "right" (from a resource conservation/load management point of view) thing to do. Julian. ========================= > Bye, > > Leonard. > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Redhat-list mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list ---------------------------------------------------------------- Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after me ... Julian Opificius. ICQ 3268206. ---------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
