On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 12:26:35AM -0500, Chris Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 11:19:32PM +0100, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote:
> > On 18-Jan-99 05:51:16, Chris Johnson wrote something about "Re: Three solutions
>for spam". I just couldn't help replying to it, thus:
> >
> > > I've always wondered why Dan doesn't have an MX record for koobera (though
> > > it doesn't really matter now that we're supposed to be using list.cr.yp.to).
> > > An A record is all that's required to get the mail delivered, but if there
> > > were an MX record my name server would cache it, rather than making a query
> > > in vain for a non-existent MX record every time a message needs to go there.
> >
> > There is such a thing as caching of negative replies. Correct me if I'm
> > wrong, but IIRC, BIND does so.
>
> I think recent versions of BIND do cache negative replies, but only for a very
> short time. I don't have any documentation handy, but I think it's only for ten
> minutes. So having an MX record, even if you already have an A record, would
> cut down on name server queries.
Well, I've been discussing this very subject (negative caching) with some friends
very deeply after the .nl domain-registry decided to f*ck things up badly.
BIND caches negative (authorative) replies for 10 minutes, indeed.
Greetz, Peter.
--
.| Peter van Dijk
.| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
