Local DNS cache, best option

ksool · Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:41 pm Post subject: Local DNS cache, best option

I'd like to set up a local dns cache. I had hoped there would be some option in the kernel/network stack somewhere to achieve this easily, but that doesn't seem to be the case. After that, it looks like I'd have to setup djbdns and have it run as a local cache, which seems like a decent solution. Anybody know if this is the best solution?

Thanks.

PaulBredbury · Watchman Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 7310

Why not just run bind.

ksool · Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 6:45 pm Post subject:

I had though (hoped) djbdns would be a little lighter and much easier to setup. I have one server running bind for a local network, but my main concern is just trying to have the smallest impact possible on my workstation.

think4urs11 · Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:00 pm Post subject:

you can use dnsmasq alternatively
_________________
Nothing is secure / Security is always a trade-off with usability / Do not assume anything / Trust no-one, nothing / Paranoia is your friend / Think for yourself

ksool · Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:28 pm Post subject:

I would assume I could use any dns server for this purpose (just make sure it only accepts local inbound connections) but is there anyone that is best suited for this (being a local cache on a workstation rather than an external cache on a server)? It isn't seeming like it so I may flip a coin to choose between dnsmasq, djbdns and bind.

think4urs11 · Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:29 pm Post subject:

dnsmasq is very light on ressources, bind needs much more in comparison, not sure about djbdns though
_________________
Nothing is secure / Security is always a trade-off with usability / Do not assume anything / Trust no-one, nothing / Paranoia is your friend / Think for yourself

PaulBredbury · Watchman Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 7310

dnsmasq still has the problem that we rely on someone else's DNS server, which probably plays it own games with caching, and is (like mine) slow & unreliable.

I don't have any problems with bind (in the configurations in the thread I linked to), so I recommend it always.

(Dunno about djbdns.)

ksool · Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 8:11 pm Post subject:

Thanks guys. It sounds like I'll go with dnsmasq. I think any solution would require another DNS server just because I'm only really trying to prevent repeated DNS calls, so that even if a DNS server is slow, I only have to call it once.

I wonder if this will be friendly with DHCP/changing name servers when moving across networks. I know bind, for example, fails to startup if it can't contact its reference name servers.