rbl-style zones?

[Stefan Schmidt]

On Sun, May 08, 2005 at 10:17:41PM +0000, Paul Vixie wrote:
> this brings up two questions.
> 
> first, i asked here a month or so ago whether there was general interest
> in a "subtype rbl;" option on master/slave zones, that would eschew TXT RRs
> and force some kind of patricia-tree or bitmap storage for the A/AAAA RRs.
> what i heard was a great big "yawn".  did i hear wrong?

*cough* Well i just did not look in my bind-workers folder for that duration,
if i had i would have expressed my/our interest in such a feature.

> second, did anybody notice that the load/unload time for RBL-style zones got
> a LOT better in 9.3.1 (compared to 9.3.0 and any 9.2 or earlier, even BIND8)?
> this was a relatively easy hashing fix having to do with deep/sparse zones,
> but we didn't exactly put out a press release about it.  did anybody notice?

Our postmasters will upgrade to 9.3.1 from 9.3.0 and tell me the results in a
few days. I'll let you know if ne noticed any improvements then.

> so, should we offer a "subtype rbl;" that uses more of a packed-bit-array
> for storage?  if that's only going to help a dozen people, it's not worth
> the complexity.  if it's going to help hundreds or thousands of people, we
> can think about putting it in there.

Well we have several million clients and i know that it would be helpful for 
Ed too, but other than that i have no idea how big the userbase for this
feature would be. How about a poll?

	Stefan
-- 
DeVries' Dilemma: If you hit two keys on the typewriter, the one you don't want
                  hits the paper.