Some domains don't resolve.
kcd at chrysler.com
Tue Jun 10 20:46:54 UTC 2008
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.
It's not a different issue, since many if not most ISPs don't "engineer"
for load, they just throw more hardware at the problem when the users
complain about bad performance. Squeaky-wheel theory of "engineering".
When you do your own iterative resolution you're not reliant on your
ISP's competence or incompetence at anticipating load spikes.
More information about the bind-users