[Novalug] dnsmasq question
Bryan J. Smith
b.j.smith at ieee.org
Wed Jan 6 00:24:07 EST 2010
I never said I was older. But based on your continued responses,
I often have to remind you that I am "not a young'n" in Internet terms.
So please heed the comments when I say "ignore old dogs" who
say otherwise. ;)
I know the HOSTS.TXT eventually exceeded 100K blocks, although I was
getting into it just when the majority of hosts were not sharing it any more. I
wasn't as close to the 6,000 hosts crowd, but closer 60,000 hosts crowd --
basically by the time the 130-132s were assigned in the mid-to-late '80s.
I already answered your question regarding DNSMasq. The answer
should have hit you in the face. I.e., default DNSMasq configuration
-- *0* changes -- is to read /etc/hosts for private, read /etc/resolve.conf
for forwarders, and cache requests for subnets that are 0 hop (direct)
or otherwise configured in various ONC files. So what would you
----- Original Message ----
From: James Ewing Cottrell 3rd <JECottrell3 at comcast.net>
Woof Sir? Just saying that I'm an old dog too. Probably older.
As someone who dropped the original Berkeley Bind into 4.2BSD (or was it 4.3? I forget) at NIST circa mid 1980s...
ISC was created as a spinoff by UUNET/Usenix later, probably as a home for INN and BIND.
Lessee, how big was the HOSTS.TXT file that htable used to process?
Not sure, but I was RBJ at ICST-CMR.ARPA (which was previously NBS-UNIX Arpanet Node before we removed it from the IMP) before DNS was born. Netwise, we were 129.6, a pretty low Class B address.
Other than Intention of Use, I'm not sure I see much difference.
OK, I'll take your word for it, and investigate it myself.
That DJB is a Hoot, that's what he is. An acquired taste.
Well, ya can't beat that! I tend to generate my zones from /etc/hosts anyway, so great!
So ... my one question still remains...
Would you also recommend it as a caching-only nameserver over BIND?
More information about the Novalug