Re: [plug] Re: BIND alternatives

[vince cagud]

personally, i find djbdns a pain in the ass to configure, like having to run dnscachex on the LAN IP and tinydns in the localhost IP to have a recursive and authoritative name serving machine(having internal and external nameservers). i guess it's a natural offshoot of having to change to the bernstein way of doing things. i.e using server tools and /service...and what not.

i do like the small memory footprint though. maybe a mix of bind and tinydns/dnscache will do the trick for me. i'm thinking bind on the info-replication part, and djb on Internet-serving part. i'll see if my computing resources allow it.

to ian's reply, i dont have control of some of the secondaries that's why i have to maintain standards compliance.

--vince

Andre John Cruz wrote:

in my opinion, BIND 9 with its chrooted nameserver running as user named is
good enough. that's WAY better than when i ran BIND 8.2.something as root,
and my machine was 0wn3d by the Li0N worm :) but in general, i find DJBDNS
faster and i like it espousing the more sound way of managing DNS, that is,
separating caching nameservers (dnscache) and authoritative nameservers
(tinydns)...

-dre

_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fully Searchable Archives With Friendly Web Interface at http://marc.free.net.ph

To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]