Which version of BIND to use on FreeBSD 6.1?

[Derek Ragona]

I am using the default 9.X that is installed with 6.1.  The only problems I 
have had is that startup options changed and required another define in 
rc.conf.

         -Derek


At 02:41 PM 1/3/2007, patrick wrote:
>I'm trying to figure out which is the best version of BIND to use on
>FreeBSD 6.1? I've always stuck with FreeBSD's base version, and since
>upgrading from FreeBSD 4.x to 6.1, that meant moving from BIND 8.3.x
>to 9.3.2. I've encountered numerous problems since moving to 9.3.2
>which primarily revolve around exponential increases in memory and CPU
>usage.
>
>On our BIND 8.3.x setup, we have 750 master domains. Memory usage is
>just shy of 70MBs. On our new server with BIND 9.3.2, we have
>currently 140 master domains, and memory usage continually grows until
>FreeBSD cuts it off. I have discovered the "max-cache-size" option
>which allows me set an upper limit, but when the named process hits
>that limit, it starts eating up all available CPU cycles. I've seen
>some similar reports from other users, but haven't found any real
>solutions.
>
>While browsing the ports tree, I found I have my pick of BIND 8.3.x,
>8.4.x, and a ports version of 9.3.x (not sure exactly how this differs
>from base -- more current?). Our needs are fairly basic -- we have a
>few DNS servers, and each are masters and slaves, helping one another
>out. We're not using DNSSEC or anything. I'm wondering what other
>people are generally using, and which version works best for them?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Patrick
>_______________________________________________
>freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
>http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
>To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>
>--
>This message has been scanned for viruses and
>dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>believed to be clean.
>MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support.
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support.