First, the question why use ldap as dns backend tends to be more or
less philosophical, but in two words, (at least) when you have medium
sized zones and organizations, LDAP is *a very convenient central
repository of all organizational information* and is easily administered
using e.g. phpldapadmin and other ldap browsers. Openldap is fast and
has cached indexes, which speeds up queries. It also has extended
access-control capabilities and fast real-time replication mechanism
(syncrepl) which can be used to run dns queries from a local slave
("consumer"). Especially when expected number of authoritative queries
in not extremely high, pdns/ldap can handle them nicely.
One could argue that you can do all that quite well with mysql, and I
can't argue against that. I would say only that when data in the
repository does not change very often (i.e. is not "transactional"),
LDAP is very well suited (also standards-based, well-defined and
supported by all modern software for authentication etc.). There is a
good discussion in all major LDAP textbooks. One can also find a good
discussion on why use bdb as openldap database against relational db (at
the openldap pages).
In any case, returning to pdns/ldap notify support, I thought of filing
a bug, but this simply is not a bug, but rather expected behavior,
athough we ldap-backend users have a hard time with it!
All the best,
Nick
On 2/10/2010 1:49 μμ, Nils Breunese (Lemonbit) wrote:
I have no experience with using LDAP as a backend myself (I don't even
know why you'd want to use LDAP as a backend), but have you actually
filed a request ticket in the bug tracker?
_______________________________________________
Pdns-users mailing list
Pdns-users@mailman.powerdns.com
http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users
