[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] BIND10? No, thanks.
bisson at archlinux.org
Sat Mar 9 18:39:31 EST 2013
[2013-03-09 21:37:01 +0000] Mike Cloaked:
> Apologies for replying to my own previous post, but having read up a little
> more about authoritative and caching/recursive namerservers - it seems that
> a good alternative to bind (which I use on all my machines especially as a
> local authoritative DNS server for local networking) would be to use nsd as
> the pure authoritative nameserver in combination with unbound as a
> recursive caching nameserver. Both are packages available in arch. Once
> installed both have systemd service files, and it seems that setting them
> up is not too difficult - and I already had ldns installed (presume from
> the base install) so I guess having those three packages running would give
> a pretty good alternative to bind/dnstools
Thank you so much for finally doing some basic research.
Let me make this entirely clear for everyone:
- ldns and dnstools are query tools (their main use is to send a single
DNS request to a resolving server, and display the request).
- bind is a multi-purpose server.
- nsd is an authoritative server.
- unbound is a resolving server.
We will simply remove dnstools from [core] and replace it by ldns where
needed; additionally, I will stop maintaining bind and suggest people
switch to nsd (if they were using bind as an authoritative server) or
unbound (if they were using bind as a resolving and/or caching server).
> it would be nice to know
> if anyone is already using these and could post on how well they perform?
No. This list is not a tea room. There is plenty of information showing
that ldns+unbound+nsd perform very well (much better than bind in fact)
available on the Web anyone can look up; do also note that three of the
thirteen root nameservers have switched from bind to nsd in the past few
years. And please just do keep using your research skills.
More information about the arch-general