On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:47:39 +0100
Simon Hobson <linux@???> wrote:

> richard lucassen <mailinglists@???> wrote:
>
> >> And what I was saying is: You should run one on modern networked
> >> *ix machine generally. Because it's 2016.
> >
> > I do not agree.
>
> +1
>
> > If the local machine generates quite a bunch of queries
> > than you're right. So, if you have (in 2016) let's say forty servers
> > running in a network, they are all going to query the root servers?
> > I think it's better to have one resolver that does the job for such
> > a network. But you're right to install a caching DNS on a server
> > that makes a lot of queries. I'd use that caching DNS as a
> > forwarder to the central DNS and not one that is going to bother
> > the root-servers.
>
> Unless you have just one device on your network, then you should not
> be running a recursive resolver on each of them - that's just being
> antisocial to the internet.

What would happen in djbdns' dnscache if you put your LAN's resolver at
the head of the list of root DNS servers? Is there any way of telling
dnscache "use this root server if at all possible?"

My idea, if it's possible, would be a way to have the office-wide
caching and world resource conservation of a LAN level resolver, but
still have a complete and capable host resolver.

SteveT

Steve Litt
August 2016 featured book: Manager's Guide to Technical Troubleshooting
Brand new, second edition
http://www.troubleshooters.com/mgr