Caching DNS Server?

[Benjamin Walkenhorst]

Danny MacMillan wrote:

>No doubt BIND can do this ... but I find djbdns much easier to configure.
>  
>
I have never tried out djbdns, so I cannot say for myself, and I also 
understand that apparently
djbdns has caused similarly intense discussions as KDE-vs-GNOME or 
vi-vs-emacs; so I want to
make clear that I am not ranting about djbdns.

But I don't really find BIND hard to configure as a caching nameserver. 
I run BIND on my NetBSD machine
doing exactly that, and the caching part took  no modification to the 
default configuration to work.

On the other hand, like I said, I haven't worked with djbdns so far - 
from what I know it seems to be
worth trying.
I'm just a lazy person, so I never bothered trying when I had BIND 
installed already. =) And since
I've been working on a BIND4-to-BIND9-migration for the recent months I 
got kind of used to it.

Still, I really like the idea of having seperate servers for resolving 
recursive queries and for hosting zones,
since this affects both security and performance. Nominum, the company 
that wrote BIND9, offers a commercial,
closed-source nameserver as well, that also uses different servers for 
caching and hosting authoritative zon data.

Then again, performance shouldn't differ for home use.

Kind regards,
Benjamin