/dev/rob0 wrote:
Think of it in djbdns terms. DJB makes the point that recursion is a different job than authoritative name service, so he implemented them as separate daemons: dnscache and tinydns respectively. Furthermore, even BIND people (which I am one, sort of) will recommend keeping the functions separate, at least with views, if not using separate processes (or machines) altogether.
well, it would be nice to have a recursive DNS component independent of dnsmasq because I hate counting on external servers unless there is no other alternative. On the other hand, I am just using openDNS as my external name servers and that certainly works fine... usually.
IWFM, and I'm happy with it.
For the simplicity, dnsmasq definitely wins.
