[arch-general] [arch-dev-public] BIND10? No, thanks.

[Gaetan Bisson]

[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.

-- 
Gaetan