OK I have the source of the problem now I just need an elegant way to
fix it and most cost ( Network TCP ) effective way to fix it
The Windows Domain is responsible for X.internal.example.com and I am
presently forwarding X.internal.example.com to their nameservers DC,
resulting in TCP queries.
On Oct 28, 2013, at 8:08 PM, brett smith brett.s9...@gmail.com wrote:
OK I have the source of the problem now I just need an elegant way to
fix it and most cost ( Network TCP ) effective way to fix it
The Windows Domain is responsible for X.internal.example.com and I am
presently
Hi—
On Oct 28, 2013, at 9:05 PM, Alan Clegg a...@clegg.com wrote:
Slave X.internal.example.com
+1; it’s also worth looking into why there is such a high volume
of DNS queries. Is it simply a big network with a lot of chatty
clients? Or is TTL turned down so low that client side caching
is not
Hi,
Kevin Darcy k...@chrysler.com writes:
Are these queries mostly for names in an Active Directory domain? The
default for Active Directory is for *every* Domain Controller to
register NS records at the apex of the AD domain. Pretty soon, for any
reasonably-sized AD infrastructure, all of
On Oct 21, 2013, at 9:47 AM, wbr...@e1b.org wrote:
From: Alan Clegg a...@clegg.com
Fix your windows clients.
You can't fix stupid.
I have lots of windows clients and they don't exhibit this feature. There's
something wrong on the windows clients and it's not the norm.
To be honest,
-Original Message-
From: Alan Clegg a...@clegg.com
Date: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 7:44 AM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Performance Tuning RHEL 5 and Bind
On Oct 21, 2013, at 9:47 AM, wbr...@e1b.org wrote:
From: Alan Clegg a...@clegg.com
Fix
Are these queries mostly for names in an Active Directory domain? The
default for Active Directory is for *every* Domain Controller to
register NS records at the apex of the AD domain. Pretty soon, for any
reasonably-sized AD infrastructure, all of those NSes cause *all*
queries for *any* name
October 2013 12:35 PM
To: sth...@nethelp.no
Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Performance Tuning RHEL 5 and Bind
When all the Windows PC's are switched to our resolver, bind stops
responding.
rndc querylog shows queries coming thru, I changed tcp-clients from
1000 to 1 but DNS seems
On Oct 22, 2013, at 8:29 PM, brett smith brett.s9...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes tuning off IPTABLES conn-tracking makes a huge difference. I also
followed:
https://access.redhat.com/site/solutions/304713
https://access.redhat.com/site/solutions/168483
I still see some SYN_SENT from Windows
From: Alan Clegg a...@clegg.com
Fix your windows clients.
You can't fix stupid.
Confidentiality Notice:
This electronic message and any attachments may contain confidential or
privileged information, and is intended only for the individual or entity
identified above as the addressee. If
-
From: bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of
wbr...@e1b.org
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 9:47 AM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Performance Tuning RHEL 5 and Bind
From: Alan Clegg
On 20 October 2013 02:34, brett smith brett.s9...@gmail.com wrote:
When all the Windows PC's are switched to our resolver, bind stops responding.
rndc querylog shows queries coming thru, I changed tcp-clients from
1000 to 1 but DNS seems lagging, so we switched back to the
original
On Oct 19, 2013, at 9:34 PM, brett smith brett.s9...@gmail.com wrote:
When all the Windows PC's are switched to our resolver, bind stops responding.
What does stops responding mean? Any logs?
rndc querylog shows queries coming thru, I changed tcp-clients from
1000 to 1 but DNS seems
Subject: Re: Performance Tuning RHEL 5 and Bind
When all the Windows PC's are switched to our resolver, bind stops
responding.
rndc querylog shows queries coming thru, I changed tcp-clients from
1000 to 1 but DNS seems lagging, so we switched back to the
original Windows Domain resolver
I need to build a pair DNS cache servers to support 5000+ clients (
PC's and Servers ). I have been looking for some guides on tuning
BIND and the OS for Enterprise performance rather than the defaults.
The version of bind is bind-9.8.2.
5000 clients is such a low number that I don't think
I need to build a pair DNS cache servers to support 5000+ clients (
PC's and Servers ). I have been looking for some guides on tuning
BIND and the OS for Enterprise performance rather than the defaults.
The version of bind is bind-9.8.2.
Thank You,
Brett
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy C. Reed jr...@isc.org
Date: Friday, November 30, 2012 4:18 PM
To: Adamiec, Lawrence ladam...@kentlaw.iit.edu
Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: another performance tuning question
On Fri, 30 Nov 2012, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote
I must be doing something wrong. I ran queryperf and the results don't
look right, 13 and 23 queries per second? What am I doing wrong? I ran
the queryperf on the same machine that is running BIND. I got similar
results when running against the master server.
I ran the test one right after
On Fri, 30 Nov 2012, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote:
I got similar results when running against the master server.
Then why so many lost?
Queries sent: 11000 queries
Queries completed: 8968 queries
Queries lost: 2032 queries
...
Percentage completed: 81.53%
Adamiec, Lawrence ladam...@kentlaw.iit.edu writes:
Hello Lawrence,
you problems might not be related to the configuration of your DNS
Server software (BIND), but it can be related to your internal name
resolution inside your organisation (forwarders, caches, mixed
caching/authoritative DNS etc).
Adamiec, Lawrence ladam...@kentlaw.iit.edu wrote on 11/26/2012
01:12:48 PM:
To the best of my knowledge, there are no problems with our DNS. We
only host 25 domains.
The report must also address these two specific questions:
1. Why does www.kentlaw.iit.edu load quicker than
Hi,
My original post was about writing a report to optimize our DNS servers and
the report needed to address two questions. Based on the answers I
received, I will write our servers are already optimized and no further
tuning is needed.
Now about the two specific questions for the report.
Q1
Hi,
I have been tasked with authoring a DNS report to achieve optimal
performance. The report must include:
CPU usage
memory usage
bandwidth usage
throughput
latency
I have found some information regarding the number of queries processed per
minute but nothing of value for the above areas.
Is
What a delightfully vague requirement. :)
I would push back a bit on exactly what problems are attempted to be
solved here. The BIND defaults are about as efficient as they can be,
especially so in later versions.
Doug
On 11/26/2012 11:01 AM, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote:
Hi,
I have been tasked
To the best of my knowledge, there are no problems with our DNS. We only
host 25 domains.
The report must also address these two specific questions:
1. Why does www.kentlaw.iit.edu load quicker than kentlaw.iit.edu in any
browser?
2. What happens if we remove the forwarders option
.
From: bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of
Adamiec, Lawrence
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 1:13 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Performance tuning
To the best of my knowledge
On 26/11/12 19:12, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote:
To the best of my knowledge, there are no problems with our DNS. We
only host 25 domains.
The report must also address these two specific questions:
1. Why does www.kentlaw.iit.edu http://www.kentlaw.iit.edu load
quicker than
=water@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org] *On
Behalf Of *Adamiec, Lawrence
*Sent:* Monday, November 26, 2012 1:13 PM
*To:* bind-users@lists.isc.org
*Subject:* Re: Performance tuning
To the best of my knowledge, there are no problems with our DNS
-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org [mailto:
bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org] *On Behalf Of *Adamiec,
Lawrence
*Sent:* Monday, November 26, 2012 1:13 PM
*To:* bind-users@lists.isc.org
*Subject:* Re: Performance tuning
** **
To the best of my knowledge
in
overall timing.
** **
*From:* bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org [mailto:
bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org] *On Behalf Of *Adamiec,
Lawrence
*Sent:* Monday, November 26, 2012 1:13 PM
*To:* bind-users@lists.isc.org
*Subject:* Re: Performance tuning
Hi--
On Nov 26, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote:
The report must also address these two specific questions:
• Why does www.kentlaw.iit.edu load quicker than kentlaw.iit.edu in any
browser?
• What happens if we remove the forwarders option from named.conf?
I can't
I see no problems.
[ec2-user@domU-12-31-39-06-2E-64 ~]$ time dig www.kentlaw.iit.edu
; DiG 9.7.0-P2-RedHat-9.7.0-5.P2.6.amzn1 www.kentlaw.iit.edu
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 54160
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0,
Thanks to everyone who replied.
Larry
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Leonardo Santagostini
lsantagost...@gmail.com wrote:
I see no problems.
[ec2-user@domU-12-31-39-06-2E-64 ~]$ time dig www.kentlaw.iit.edu
; DiG 9.7.0-P2-RedHat-9.7.0-5.P2.6.amzn1 www.kentlaw.iit.edu
;; global
Dear All
This is in reference to the performance tuning , i had already gone through
the mailing list archives , but could not find answer to my
specific query mentioned here.
I had installed bind as a caching name server for test purposes and
planning to test performance that could give me
On 7/13/2010 1:11 PM, Shiva Raman wrote:
Dear All
This is in reference to the performance tuning , i had already gone
through the mailing list archives , but could not find answer to my
specific query mentioned here.
Right now i am using queryperf to test the performance with sample query
35 matches
Mail list logo
