North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: djbdns: An alternative to BIND

  • From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
  • Date: Fri Apr 08 22:05:02 2005
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=qRy6JoDpbtK+9+XTmLVWppHDijcgYQYmuNCAQEioXINBSJqaeKlF1fXDtFKYkKXtZIwLspLVlsdIXRWvjcI4mUKXr9yL2TE6HUYKYKLgdjq9YZx7u1wGUVMh6q37uKXExn4vLI4UUlTD1yqU6BoreN85G2RkRzaSROaE9Kr8iiA=
On Apr 9, 2005 7:26 AM, Niek <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 4/9/2005 3:46 AM +0100, Nathan Ward wrote:
> > I had a play with DJBDNS after using BIND for years. Here's why I
> > switched back:
> > - No AXFR support
> It supports this.

No IXFR, no automatic notification of bind slaves (you get to run a
separate notify script) ...

But yes, it is far easier to use, consumes very low amounts of memory
and makes an excellent local resolver cache e&oe no roundrobin DNS
without a patch (as in it returns all the A records in the same order
every time, whereas bind does this in a different order ...)

No v6 support without a patch either 

Oh yes, patch, patch ... welcome to patching hell if you run qmail or
any other djb ware :)

--srs
-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian ([email protected])