Hi, Thanks to me to politely reply. 2014-12-17 15:16 GMT+09:00 Evan Hunt <e...@isc.org>: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 01:30:35PM +0900, Techs_Maru wrote: >> However, >> if the value of the default "7" would be the value that was created >> based on the world data ? >> ( Also for the default value of "max-recursion-queries 50;" ) > > I haven't personally seen any real world queries go more than 4 > levels deep, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are a were domains > out there that do. 7 seemed like a safe upper limit. > > The default max-recursion-queries value of 50, we got by testing with a > sample of real-world resolver traffic. It turns out it isn't quite right, > though. A limit of 50 works fine with a populated cache (which is > how we were testing it), but if the server is just starting up and the > nameservers for .com and .org and .net and so on aren't in cache yet, > then it *can* take more than 50 queries to resolve a name. (This turns > out to be especially true on 9.10, due to changes in EDNS processing > that affect how much NS glue we get from servers in the early stages of > populating the cache.) We'll be making some adjustments in upcoming > maintenance releases to allow for this. > >> I want to know the recommended settings for everyone to values. > > I'd leave the defaults alone on BIND 9.9. On 9.10, I might consider > increasing max-recursion-queries to 100, but be prepared to back the > change out when updating to the next release. Or leave the defaults > alone but be prepared for the possibility of some SERVFAIL responses in > the first few minutes after server startup.
Sorry,Lack of knowledge, 9.10.X and 9.9.x QueryFlow is different ?? By the way, value even in the case of dual-stack name servers is okay without changing ? regards. _______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
