On 04/03/2015 10:33 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 02:52:46PM -0500, T.J. Duchene wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Adam Borowski [mailto:kilobyte@angband.pl]
>>>
>>> Then why not set up a recursor by default? Benefits include:
>>> * avoiding this privacy issue
>>> * caching
>>> * secure DNSSEC (no last mile issues)
>>
>
>> [T.J. ] Oh I agree, however, there is no accounting for taste or common
>> sense. Each of these Linux distributors has their own quirks that everyone
>> who uses their Linux is subjected to.
>
> If I recall correctly, so far *every* Linux I've used uses an external
> DNS by default instead of installing its own recursor.
>
> I figure there must be a reason, but I don't know what it is.
>
> -- hendrik

Setting up a local name (bind(8)) server is moderately complex. In a
complete installation, there are multiple file. A typical bind(8) setup
includes, for each logical segment X.Y.Z.0 with the domain name
'DomainName':

/var/named/DomainName/
  X.Y.Z.forward    
  controls
  domain.master
  domain.slave    
  forward
  reverse
  zone.master
  zone.slave

    
Maintaining this is a pain.

Since a local LAN should use reserved addresses (e.g., 10.100.100.0/24),
they need not be registered with ICANN.
Rather, one uses a router to map them (NAT) to the single real IP
supplied by your ISP.

Your LAN server must be on for the DNS server to be active.

Even more relevant, is that most modern DD-WRT routers have static
mapping tables that are effectively a name server for the router's
segment. In this table, one can map a MAC address to a host name
(hostname -s) and an IP.

Before inexpensive routers would do name resolution and assignment of IP
Via DHCP, I maintained my own DNS and NIS server. I have happily
relegated this task to my LAN's router.