SV: BIND 9.1.2 and TinyDNS???

[Brad Knowles]

At 12:19 AM +0200 6/20/01, Markus Stumpf wrote:

>  We had problems with all bind versions 4.x and 8.x when they hit the
>  memory limit. These versions have no mechanism to expire/remove records
>  from the cache and simply die.
>  Dunno about bind 9.x though.

	IIRC, I believe that BIND 9.2 solves this problem.

>  There are 2 solutions to this problem:
>  - put more memory in the machine
>  - use dnscache. It replaces cached records on a fifo basis if it runs out
>    of memory.

	You should always be able to put more memory in a nameserver, or 
any machine for that matter.  Adding memory is one of the cheapest, 
fastest, and easiest ways to be able to increase the performance of 
any machine.


	Indeed, ultra-low profile (1.25" high) 512MB PC100 SODIMMS 
(capable of taking an Apple PowerBook G4 to 1GB of RAM) are available 
for just $291 each (or less, see <http://www.memorytogo.com/>).

	With these kinds of prices on some of the most expensive memory 
around (because of its requirements for size, speed, and power draw), 
why wouldn't you want to increase the memory in any machine that 
could possibly benefit?

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles at skynet.be>

/*        efdtt.c  Author:  Charles M. Hannum <root at ihack.net>          */
/*       Represented as 1045 digit prime number by Phil Carmody         */
/*     Prime as DNS cname chain by Roy Arends and Walter Belgers        */
/*                                                                      */
/*     Usage is:  cat title-key scrambled.vob | efdtt >clear.vob        */
/*   where title-key = "153 2 8 105 225" or other similar 5-byte key    */

dig decss.friet.org|perl -ne'if(/^x/){s/[x.]//g;print pack(H124,$_)}'