Some domains don't resolve.
ccc2716 at vip.cybercity.dk
Sat Jun 7 08:30:32 UTC 2008
The question as I read it, is if a very small amount of users will
benefit most from using the cached lookups of a large number of users
(the whole ISP population) or from having their own independent resolver.
I have that situation here, I first used forward but later switched to
just resolving. My feeling (I have no statistics) is clearly in favour
of NOT forwarding. I don't see any speed penalty in real life but got
rid of some mysterious issues that happened while forwarding and the
speed seems to be higher.
just my 2¢
Barry Margolin wrote:
> In article <g2aeee$1bb9$1 at sf1.isc.org>, Kevin Darcy <kcd at chrysler.com>
>> Barry Margolin wrote:
>>> But if your ISP has 100,000 users of the same caching server, it will be
>>> cached if any of 1,000 users have accessed it recently. For any one of
>>> them, there's only a 0.1% chance that their lookup will be the one that
>>> has to wait for fetching from the source.
>> And if you have 100,000 users using the same caching server, it's likely
>> to experience big spikes of activity (e.g. several thousands of queries,
>> within the course of less than a second), during which time some users
>> will experience some extra delay in getting their queries resolved.
> Certainly if the nameserver is not engineered to handle the load it's a
> bad idea to use it as a forwarder. That's a completely different issue
> than whether it's useful to share caches via a forwarding hierarchy.
No improvements come from shouting:
"MALE BOVINE MANURE!!!"
More information about the bind-users