Setting up a Root name server

chris chris at megabytecoffee.com
Mon Sep 6 17:35:57 UTC 1999



Michael Voight wrote:

> Jim Reid wrote:
> >
> >
> > You've not identified the performance problem, far less indicated how
> > slaving all the top-level domains will improve things.
>
> Simple point. How is not being a DNS rootserver affecting his ability to
> run his business??? If using the internet's root servers is good enough
> for Cisco, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Sun (who puts the dot in dot com,
> according to their ads) etc, why doesn't it work for your network?
>
> A DNS query to an uncached entry is only going to take a few seconds.
> Once cached, you won't have to look it up again until the TTL expires.
>
> So, the question isn't how to be a root server for the real root domain,
> it is why you need to.

Good question, the fact is that I don't need to do this. I don't need to run
a root server. The setup we have now really is great.Our network is the
fastest I know of, but...

 A couple of weeks ago, I was talking to one of my coworkers about the TLD
agreement we have with network solutions. We were discussing what we could
constructively do with the data. One of the comments that was made in jest
was "We could run our own root name server." Well, after some thought I
realized that might not be such a bad idea. There could be a performance
gain in having a root server on the local network if I could make it work. I
discussed this with some of the others and they thought it would be a good
idea to give it a try... So, instead of arguing with everyone and telling
them "we dont' need it" "it can't be done"... I'm going to do it.

- Chris





More information about the bind-users mailing list