Problem with 9.1.1

[Brad Knowles]

At 9:45 AM -0700 4/24/01, Doug Barton wrote:

>                                              Also, I stand by my statement
>  that there are no artificial restrictions that prevent the cache from
>  growing past that. I can think of several situations that don't fall into a
>  "normal" usage pattern that could create a resolver pattern that far
>  exceeds what human users might do, no matter how many of them there are.

	The authors of BIND have told us that it is designed to stabilize 
its cache size after one week of operation.  While this does not 
place any specific limitations on the size that the named process can 
grow to, it does tell us that if a very busy caching nameserver 
stabilizes at a particular size, you're unlikely to find any other 
caching nameservers that are likely to need much more memory than 
that.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles at skynet.be>

/*        efdtt.c  Author:  Charles M. Hannum <root at ihack.net>          */
/*       Represented as 1045 digit prime number by Phil Carmody         */
/*     Prime as DNS cname chain by Roy Arends and Walter Belgers        */
/*                                                                      */
/*     Usage is:  cat title-key scrambled.vob | efdtt >clear.vob        */
/*   where title-key = "153 2 8 105 225" or other similar 5-byte key    */

dig decss.friet.org|perl -ne'if(/^x/){s/[x.]//g;print pack(H124,$_)}'