> My experiments on real mail servers show that DNS caching is quite
> ineffective for DNSBLs (at least for typical ones like Spamhaus that
> use a short TTL on the order of 15-30 minutes.)
On Tue, 5 Jul 2011 12:20:18 +0200
Michelle Konzack <linux4miche...@tamay-dogan.net> wrote:
Is the TTL set global or are the TTLs set by IP?
On 05.07.11 16:37, David F. Skoll wrote:
My simulation assumed the same TTL for all addresses. But that's not
relevant to cache effectiveness since most IPs are not listed in a
DNSBL (and you end up using the negative-cache-TTL.)
Negative caching can be effective or in this case even
ineffective too, can't it?
I have a local bind9 which implement my private list and it set the
TTL per target which is quiet effectiv
If most targets are not listed, per-IP TTLs don't matter.
They do, if the targets repeat.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
How does cat play with mouse? cat /dev/mouse
