On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 05:22:49PM -0700, Steve Jenkins wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Joe <j...@tmsusa.com> wrote:
> > IMNSHO it's standard practice to run a dns server on the MX host.
> > If you don't want a full blown bind server, at least run some
> > sort of caching dns server; the difference in the lookup times
> > has a big impact when you're sending messages at a high rate.
>
> Thx, Joe. Any advantage IYNSHO to running a full blown bind server
> as opposed to something simpler like dnsmasq or nsd (or anything
> else you're recommend)?
dnsmasq is a fine piece of software, but understand, it is not a
complete DNS implementation. It's merely a forwarder, which relies
upon having a recursive resolver to answer the queries it passes
through from clients.
"Full blown bind" could simply be named(8) without a named.conf(5)
file. It will do recursion only, and only for locally-connected
networks. Works right out of the box for exactly what you need. It
really IS that simple.
I use dnsmasq as my DHCP server and recommend it for a lot of uses.
In fact, it was made to cover a lot of common use cases. A mail
server is not really one of them. It wouldn't hurt to have dnsmasq
running on the Postfix host, but a recursive resolver like named is
best. Yes, dnsmasq will cache lookups, and cache hits will improve
your performance substantially.
--
Offlist mail to this address is discarded unless
"/dev/rob0" or "not-spam" is in Subject: header
