Fw: DNS caching: Squid, BIND or anything else?

Francisco Reyes lists at natserv.com
Sat Aug 6 17:26:59 GMT 2005

On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, B. Bonev wrote:

> I think that Squid have a internal DNS server. Now, as understand I must
> have configure Squid for HTTP req, and BIND or another DNS cache server
> for DNS req...

As others have mentioned perhaps you are missunderstanding what those 
programs do. It will help if you tell us what you are trying to do.

A mini review of the tools in question

DNS server
Answers DNS requests

Squid and other proxies
Caches data

Let's say you have 3 users in a network and they all use common sites such 
as bsdnes.com or slashdot.

A caching DNS server will cache the IP for the site. Nothing else. 
Bandwith/time saved.. minimal.

A caching proxy like Squid will cache content (The actual pages) so there 
will be time/bandwith savings because only one user will have to actually 
wait to go to the actual site while the rest will get the data from the 
proxy cache.

The more users using the same sites the better performance gains you will 
see from a proxy.

For a single user there may be savings, but I think not as much. There are 
benchmarks out there that you could search, but the general rule is that 
the benefits of the cache are greater as the number of people using the 
same site increase.

Hope that helps clarify a bit.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list