Users of RBL's
glenn.steen at gmail.com
Mon Jun 26 22:54:03 IST 2006
On 26/06/06, Chris Hammond <chris at tac.esi.net> wrote:
> >>> Matt Kettler <mkettler at evi-inc.com> 06/26/06 5:12 PM >>>
> >>Chris Hammond wrote:
> >> Understood. What DNS server in most recommended?
> >Well, your choices are bind, djbdns, and microsoft.
> >I'm assuming you're using a unix box, so Microsoft is out. I'd also not call DNS
> >Microsoft's strong suit even if you have it arround. (heck, given the state of
> >NDIS 2- 5, I wouldn't call anything network- oriented their strong suite).
> >Since djbdns splits resolving and authoritative servers into two separate tools
> >it might be a bit lighter weight than bind if you're running cache/forward only.
> >However, as long as you're not splitting hairs on the edge of system collapse
> >due to overload either should work fine.
> Ok, I am going to move to a later version of bind than what comes with CentOS
> 4 which is 9.2.4 and will see if the newer version performs better. I have read
> alot of people complaining about binds speed.
'If you feel like it, why not look at some of the alternatives here:
http://www.dns.net/dnsrd/servers/unix.html ... Just a tad more
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se
More information about the MailScanner