Re: Performance tuning

Thanks to everyone who replied. Larry On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Leonardo Santagostini < lsantagost...@gmail.com> wrote: > I see no problems. > > [ec2-user@domU-12-31-39-06-2E-64 ~]$ time dig www.kentlaw.iit.edu > > ; <<>> DiG 9.7.0-P2-RedHat-9.7.0-5.P2.6.amzn1 <<>> www.kentlaw.iit.edu

Re: Performance tuning

I see no problems. [ec2-user@domU-12-31-39-06-2E-64 ~]$ time dig www.kentlaw.iit.edu ; <<>> DiG 9.7.0-P2-RedHat-9.7.0-5.P2.6.amzn1 <<>> www.kentlaw.iit.edu ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 54160 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUT

Re: Performance tuning

Hi-- On Nov 26, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote: > The report must also address these two specific questions: > > • Why does www.kentlaw.iit.edu load quicker than kentlaw.iit.edu in any > browser? > • What happens if we remove the forwarders option from named.conf? > I can

RE: Performance tuning

I did digs to both names from my work DNS infrastructure. The response was 58ms to resolve the WWW entry and 44ms for the non WWW entry. Would not appear to be a resolution related slow down. -Ben Croswell On Nov 26, 2012 1:25 PM, "Lightner, Jeff" wrote: > For question 1: > > “Loading” is

Re: Performance tuning

Hello, This sounds suspiciously like a customer I deal with trying to figure out if they want to upgrade their hardware. The bottom line is with BIND logging your not really going to get all of these specifics. You will need to utilize the regular logging for the OS level on some of this to

Re: Performance tuning

On 26/11/12 19:23, Lightner, Jeff wrote: > > For question 1: > > "Loading" is a function of the web site not DNS. Your first question > could have to do what the default site is in your web configuration > and what kind of rewrite rules are getting you to the other. > > > > If it were me I'd pr

Re: Performance tuning

On 26/11/12 19:12, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote: > To the best of my knowledge, there are no problems with our DNS. We > only host 25 domains. > > The report must also address these two specific questions: > > 1. Why does www.kentlaw.iit.edu load > quicker than kentla

RE: Performance tuning

For question 1: “Loading” is a function of the web site not DNS. Your first question could have to do what the default site is in your web configuration and what kind of rewrite rules are getting you to the other. If it were me I’d probably do some timed “host” or “dig” commands for the two re

Re: Performance tuning

To the best of my knowledge, there are no problems with our DNS. We only host 25 domains. The report must also address these two specific questions: 1. Why does www.kentlaw.iit.edu load quicker than kentlaw.iit.edu in any browser? 2. What happens if we remove the forwarders option from

Re: Performance tuning

What a delightfully vague requirement. :) I would push back a bit on exactly what problems are attempted to be solved here. The BIND defaults are about as efficient as they can be, especially so in later versions. Doug On 11/26/2012 11:01 AM, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote: > Hi, > > I have been task

Performance tuning

Hi, I have been tasked with authoring a DNS report "to achieve optimal performance." The report must include: CPU usage memory usage bandwidth usage throughput latency I have found some information regarding the number of queries processed per minute but nothing of value for the above areas. I

"rndc sign", "auto-dnssec maintain" and TYPE65534 record "stickyness"?

All, Up front, I should note that this was on a hidden master server which was running 9.7.0 (since updated). So it may not work this way on current versions of bind. We (well, I) had a little accident recently when rolling a ZSK. We use "auto-dnssec maintain" like so: zone "blah" { file