Re: Local Slave copy of root zone

2018-08-21 Thread Doug Barton
On 08/21/2018 08:53 AM, Grant Taylor via bind-users wrote: On 08/20/2018 11:06 PM, Doug Barton wrote: But that doesn't mean that slaving a zone, any zone, including the root, is "dangerous." If slaving zones is dangerous, the DNS is way more fragile than it already is. Sorry, poor chose of wo

Re: bind 9.10.6.1 vs 9.10.6

2018-08-21 Thread Curtis Blackburn
Please also note that BIND 9.10.6 is a bit old, and 9.10.8-P1 was the last release of the 9.10 series. Also note that 9.10 has reached its EOL and should be upgraded to at least 9.11. https://kb.isc.org/article/AA-01643 ~Curtis On 8/21/18 5:24 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > On 21.08.18 17

Re: Local Slave copy of root zone

2018-08-21 Thread Grant Taylor via bind-users
On 08/20/2018 11:06 PM, Doug Barton wrote: But that doesn't mean that slaving a zone, any zone, including the root, is "dangerous." If slaving zones is dangerous, the DNS is way more fragile than it already is. Sorry, poor chose of words. The last time I read the RFC discussing slaving the ro

Re: bind 9.10.6.1 vs 9.10.6

2018-08-21 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 21.08.18 17:31, rams wrote: Is there any QPS improvement bind 9.10.6 vs 9.10.6.1? because we are seeing 47K QPS on 9.10.6 and 95K QPS on 10.9.6.1 on the same zone. simple search for "bind 9.10.6.1 changelog" returns: https://kb.isc.org/article/AA-01548/0/BIND-9.10.6-P1-Release-Notes.html

bind 9.10.6.1 vs 9.10.6

2018-08-21 Thread rams
Hi, Greetings Is there any QPS improvement bind 9.10.6 vs 9.10.6.1? because we are seeing 47K QPS on 9.10.6 and 95K QPS on 10.9.6.1 on the same zone. Regards, Ramesh ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe