Bind9 shared cache
John W. Blue
john.blue at rrcic.com
Sun Apr 19 14:34:27 UTC 2020
In BIND views can be configured to share a cache on the same server but I do not think that it can be done between servers.
That said, time for a sanity check. Does this configuration resolve a specific technical problem? If so, then I would recommend you keep running your unbound system. If it does not and it is a 2nd level of cool for you, the first being you have operational DNS servers, then I would recommend you stay with your unbound system and be proud of what you have accomplished.
If, on the other hand, this is a configuration that you inherited or it is a configuration that is nice to have but you can live without it I would encourage you to stand up some BIND servers. Get them operational and start using them in parallel. I think you'll find they will perform remarkably well with individual caches.
Sent from Nine<http://www.9folders.com/>
From: Talkabout <talk.about at gmx.de>
Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2020 5:29 AM
To: bind-users at lists.isc.org
Subject: Bind9 shared cache
I am considering to switch from Unbound to Bind9 to use as DNS Server, but I have a requirement that seems to not being possible with Bind9.
Currently I am using 2 Unbound DNS Servers configured to use Redis (KeyDB as a drop-in replacement in my case) to make sure that both Servers are sharing the same Cache. That way, when server1 resolves an address and puts it into the backend database, server2 does not Need to execute Resolution for this address any more but gets it fast from the shared Cache.
I have not found any way in the Bind9 documentation to achieve a similar Thing. So my Questions are:
1. Is there a way to configure a shared Cache that is used by multiple Servers?
2. Is there a way to configure custom backends for Bind9?
3. Are there any plans to support similar Scenarios? Maybe via a Synchronisation mechanism?
Gesendet von Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> f?r Windows 10
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the bind-users