Hi Petr,

I guess that is totally possible, I had just used it for a few other projects 
so figured if it works why not use it :) The only things I use are setting 
minimum cache ttl to 30 mins and max cache size to 10k.  There is only about 
1000 endpoints of various types, from residential to business. 

It only came about because I noticed the quantity of traffic to other resolvers 
was a lot more than I expected and I guessed caching would improve the 
experience for the end users.

It functions well at this level as far as I can see, always sub ms responses 
and almost no load on server. It is just a small VM with Dnsmasq, SMTP relay 
and STUN server.

I will check out other options then if I am pushing the limits of capability

-----Original Message-----
From: Petr Mensik [mailto:pemen...@redhat.com] 
Sent: Monday, 10 April 2017 8:51 PM
To: Nathan Downes <nathandow...@hotmail.com>
Cc: dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Dnsmasq-discuss] FW: Cachesize

Hi Nathan.

If you hit a cache limit of 10000 quite often, are you sure dnsmasq is still 
the best choice for that server? I think dnsmasq focuses on small home routers 
and end networks. Have you considered other caching resolver, unbound for 
example? I think if this limit is not enough, maybe your network is not small 
enough. There is limit for some reason. I hope full cache does not mean 
recursion will stop working, but I did not validate that assumption.

I think main DNS resolvers of ISP network should use something more heavy than 
How many end hosts are using that server?
Do you require dnsmasq specific features?


Petr Menšík
Software Engineer
Red Hat, http://www.redhat.com/
email: pemen...@redhat.com  PGP: 65C6C973

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathan Downes" <nathandow...@hotmail.com>
To: dnsmasq-discuss@lists.thekelleys.org.uk
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 10:41:24 AM
Subject: [Dnsmasq-discuss] FW: Cachesize


I understand this is hardcoded to a limit of 10000 but we use it for a small 
ISP network and quite often reach this, is it possible to make it 25000 in next 
release? Everyone has the choice at loading what to set it to, so I can’t see 
how this would cause issues. I would prefer to just use available packages than 
have to compile my own to adjust this and always have to remember the 



Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list
Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to