Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-29 Thread Peter Andreev
2011/12/29 Victor Sudakov v...@mpeks.tomsk.su: Peter Andreev wrote: Victor, we researched this topic and learned that response time highly depends on distance between user and resolver, while cache influence on this value is lesser. So I advice you to keep all as is. Be it so.

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-29 Thread Victor Sudakov
Peter Andreev wrote: Victor, we researched this topic and learned that response time highly depends on distance between user and resolver, while cache influence on this value is lesser. So I advice you to keep all as is. Be it so. Thank you. And the reason for the whole

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-29 Thread Peter Andreev
2011/12/29 Victor Sudakov v...@mpeks.tomsk.su: Peter Andreev wrote: Victor, we researched this topic and learned that response time highly depends on distance between user and resolver, while cache influence on this value is lesser. So I advice you to keep all as is. Be

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-29 Thread Da Rock
On 12/29/11 12:45, Kevin Wilcox wrote: On Dec 28, 2011 9:26 PM, Victor Sudakovv...@mpeks.tomsk.su wrote: And the reason for the whole thread. One of the customers told me that 8.8.8.8 is faster than our own DNS servers which are located on the same 100 MBit/s LAN with them. I was shocked but

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Damien Fleuriot
On 12/28/11 8:54 AM, Victor Sudakov wrote: Colleagues, This question is not directly related to FreeBSD, but perhaps some network administrators reading this list know the answer. Can I setup several ISC BIND servers to be each other's mutual forwarders? Will it work or create an

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Matthew Seaman
On 28/12/2011 07:54, Victor Sudakov wrote: This question is not directly related to FreeBSD, but perhaps some network administrators reading this list know the answer. Can I setup several ISC BIND servers to be each other's mutual forwarders? Will it work or create an endless loop of DNS

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Victor Sudakov
Damien Fleuriot wrote: If you're trying to build up a cache to improve performance and response time, here's your scenario: DNS C, forward to DNS A,B for all queries DNS D, forward to DNS B,A for all queries Your cache will start building up and only responses that are not cached will

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Damien Fleuriot
On 12/28/11 2:07 PM, Victor Sudakov wrote: Damien Fleuriot wrote: If you're trying to build up a cache to improve performance and response time, here's your scenario: DNS C, forward to DNS A,B for all queries DNS D, forward to DNS B,A for all queries Your cache will start building up

mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Peter Andreev
2011/12/28 Damien Fleuriot m...@my.gd: On 12/28/11 2:07 PM, Victor Sudakov wrote: Damien Fleuriot wrote: If you're trying to build up a cache to improve performance and response time, here's your scenario: DNS C, forward to DNS A,B for all queries DNS D, forward to DNS B,A for all

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Victor Sudakov
Damien Fleuriot wrote: If you're trying to build up a cache to improve performance and response time, here's your scenario: DNS C, forward to DNS A,B for all queries DNS D, forward to DNS B,A for all queries Your cache will start building up and only responses that are not

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Victor Sudakov
Peter Andreev wrote: [dd] Victor, we researched this topic and learned that response time highly depends on distance between user and resolver, while cache influence on this value is lesser. So I advice you to keep all as is. Be it so. Thank you. -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Victor Sudakov
Victor Sudakov wrote: Victor, we researched this topic and learned that response time highly depends on distance between user and resolver, while cache influence on this value is lesser. So I advice you to keep all as is. Be it so. Thank you. And the reason for the whole thread. One

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Kevin Wilcox
On Dec 28, 2011 9:26 PM, Victor Sudakov v...@mpeks.tomsk.su wrote: And the reason for the whole thread. One of the customers told me that 8.8.8.8 is faster than our own DNS servers which are located on the same 100 MBit/s LAN with them. I was shocked but it seems true, at least for the

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Peter Andreev
2011/12/29 Victor Sudakov v...@mpeks.tomsk.su: Victor Sudakov wrote: Victor, we researched this topic and learned that response time highly depends on distance between user and resolver, while cache influence on this value is lesser. So I advice you to keep all as is. Be it so. Thank

Re: mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-28 Thread Victor Sudakov
Peter Andreev wrote: Victor, we researched this topic and learned that response time highly depends on distance between user and resolver, while cache influence on this value is lesser. So I advice you to keep all as is. Be it so. Thank you. And the reason for the whole

mutual forwarders in ISC BIND

2011-12-27 Thread Victor Sudakov
Colleagues, This question is not directly related to FreeBSD, but perhaps some network administrators reading this list know the answer. Can I setup several ISC BIND servers to be each other's mutual forwarders? Will it work or create an endless loop of DNS queries? I have customers using