In message <bddce4fa-cee9-466c-ab5c-9e3201bef...@nic.br>, Rubens Kuhl writes: > > > > I'm not sure if I phrased my question correctly. It's not about > > redundancy, but about keeping the queries to root/g(TLD) name servers > > to a minimum.
Running without a cache at all makes a difference but starting a caching nameserver has no real impact on the root servers or tld servers. > > In your example, if 127.0.0.1 was the resolver that just came up again > > after a restart, it wouldn't return a failure for a query that it has > > not yet cached. Or perhaps I just didn't understand your answer. > > If your recursive DNS server runs Unbound, you can use > > unbound-control dump-cache > <filename> > > prior to restarting > and then > > unbound-control load-cache < <filename> > > I don't recall such an option being available with BIND 9, and it's > probably a feature to suggest to BIND 10. Unless you can show a significant benefit to the clients then it is not worth the effort. It doesn't take long for most of a cache to timeout on disk. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list dns-operations@lists.dns-oarc.net https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
