Results 1 to 25 of 40
Thread: Which is the best DNS Server?
-
07-16-2009, 09:59 AM #1New Member
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Posts
- 4
Which is the best DNS Server?
Hello guys,
My friend is gonna start a service like afraid.org, and he needs a dns server which is powerful and light weight and nicely features well. He will prolly maintain millions of records so we need one which can handle that...please help
thanks and regards
edit: we are currently considering BIND, mydns and powerdns, we are not sure about which one is the best among these three, though...lolLast edited by amjadali; 07-16-2009 at 10:02 AM.
-
07-16-2009, 10:22 AM #2Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
- Posts
- 822
BIND i think is the most used dns server. have you tried to compare their features?
HalfDedi.com • Half Dedicated Half Price
We provide affordable VPS hosting solution Singapore datacenter
-
07-16-2009, 10:32 AM #3Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jan 2002
- Posts
- 1,400
powerdns, is mysql based so it should be easy to do.
-
07-16-2009, 10:43 AM #4Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Nov 2003
- Location
- Lynnwood, WA
- Posts
- 438
PowerDNS +1. Seen nothing but good things out of this package.
BIND is crap. Plain and damn simple. Anyone telling you they run a gigantic installation on BIND, and it's working, is generally one or more of the following:
* using a forked copy of the code they got or built themselves, and if built themselves generally means they literally have a 1+ staff of C developers just to maintain their BIND fork (hi, Yahoo)
* has way more staff, way more servers, and way more complexity of infrastructure than would have been necessary with other DNS servers in order to maintain their BIND install
* constantly having issues, service-impacting or not, because of their use of BIND in a giant environment
* is just ripe with potential security problems, yes, even on BIND9
BIND is the most used because it IS reasonable for a couple domain names, and is, for some stupid reason, still the default on most linux distributions and people don't think to change that. NOT because it is the best DNS server. NOT. NOT. NOT NOT NOT NOTNOTNOTNOT.
-
07-16-2009, 11:28 AM #5Support Facility
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Posts
- 2,335
I think the BIND DNS Server is used on the vast majority of name serving machines on the Internet.
-
07-16-2009, 12:47 PM #6Disabled
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Posts
- 126
Yup bind is used in almost 90% world wide.its stable and easy to debug
-
07-16-2009, 12:57 PM #7Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2003
- Location
- San Jose, CA.
- Posts
- 1,624
PowerDNS +1000000
It's not just "MySQL" based... SQL backends can be anything from MySQL, Postgress, DB2, Oracle, SQLite, etc... You can also serve standard Bind zone files in case you just want to try it out.
MyDNS is ok, but I can't really think of anything that PowerDNS can't do just as well or better. MyDNS went through a developer change a while back and the dev cycle is still sporadic with the main developer simply having more important day-job things they need to deal with.Daved @ Lightwave Networking, LLC.
AS1426 https:/www.lightwave.net
Primary Bandwidth: EGIHosting (NLayer, NTT, HE, Cogent)
Xen PV VPS Hosting
-
07-16-2009, 12:59 PM #8Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Nov 2003
- Location
- Lynnwood, WA
- Posts
- 438
Now you see why I said 'NOT' like a dozen times. Here come all the 'bind's in use everywhere' crowd who have OBVIOUSLY never hosted 100K+ domains off a bind setup. I have. I hated it.
You know where it's not in use? Big shops (or they meet one/all of my above post's criteria, like Yahoo and their multiple C programmers to maintain their own version of BIND). You know what doesn't use BIND? afraid.org, opendns.org. Etc. Which is what you say you want to build. Why? Because getting bind to pull its weight in those environments is more trouble than it is worth.
-
07-16-2009, 02:43 PM #9WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Apr 2003
- Location
- Earth
- Posts
- 156
Got $?
http://www.infoblox.com/
-
07-16-2009, 02:52 PM #10Web Hosting Evangelist
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Posts
- 480
If its going to be authoritative only - i.e. it isn't going to need to forward to other DNS servers, I'd suggest NSD (http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/projects/nsd/). It was developed for use as a root/tld server so is happy with heavy load.
-
07-16-2009, 05:48 PM #11Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Posts
- 240
whats the level of expertise does your group have?
since you are offering an authoritative DNS service - you should also look deeply into the security not only of the DNS server but the base system and packages you are deploying with it.
Look into Freebsd + TinyDNS/axfrdns (aka djbdns)
its lightweight, fast and quite secure
-
07-16-2009, 06:08 PM #12Newbie
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Location
- Izmir
- Posts
- 13
Bind is my choice Free, fast, easy to configure and administrate
-
07-16-2009, 07:35 PM #13Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- Chicago, IL
- Posts
- 219
I've personally setup and configured a Bind based setup with 250k+ domains syncing from about 180-200ish different shared hosting boxes and reloading confs every 20 mins. I think you're 100% wrong in everything you just said. Sorry. Also, Sprint uses Bind, which is something I know for a fact. Consider that every mobile device on their network has a DNS registration and performs lookups off their bind clusters. I'd call that a pretty big shop and probably generating more DNS traffic than Yahoo does although that's hard to quantify.
Now, to answer the original post,
There's quite a few different NSs out there that'll do what you want. While Bind is by far and long the most popular NS out there, it is a bit more of a pain to configure properly unless you're using a control panel type solution which should handle it for you. It's by the most documented DNS server and generally the most supported as *anyone* who's done admin stuff for awhile has had to work on them.
PowerDNS seems cool, but tbh, MySQL backed DNS isn't something that everyone needs. I think that if you're using an application to interface with your NSs and update/remove entries from some sort of frontend, then this is where PowerDNS would shine. Otherwise it's taking a simple service and making it complex.
There's always the DJB alternatives as well like TinyDNS, but those things can be a bit... interesting to setup. However they're by long and far one of the most efficient DNS servers I've ever seen. Very fast, Very small and very lightweight. However don't expect them to plugin to anything easily.
-
07-17-2009, 12:33 AM #14******* Unleaded
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 3,849
Of the four mentioned above, in terms of source code clarity/cleanliness, I would rank them as follows:
1. djbdns
2. nlnetlabs
3. powerdns
4. bind
As it happens, it is also about how I would rank them in stability.
Bind might have the most features, but that is because isc.org dominates the standards discussions. Things get put in according to the isc.org "vision". The code itself seems to have been written with a good supply of bad drugs at hand.
We don't use any of them.edgedirector.com
managed dns global failover and load balance (gslb)
exactstate.com
uptime report for webhostingtalk.com
-
07-17-2009, 03:50 AM #15server automation specialist
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Nevada
- Posts
- 662
James B
►WWW.EZEELOGIN.COM |Setup your Secure Linux SSH Gateway►MEET PCI DSS & ISO 27001 Compliance|Manage & Administer Multiple Linux Servers Quickly & Securely.
-
07-17-2009, 03:51 AM #16Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
- Location
- India
- Posts
- 266
go for BIND, easy to manage..
Ranjith
Light travels faster thn sound.This is why some people look bright until you actually hear them speak
-
07-17-2009, 01:24 PM #17Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Posts
- 227
Easy to configure and maintain go for Bind.
Binoy
-
07-17-2009, 01:35 PM #18Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Posts
- 39
For a novice user, BIND. For a bit more advanced of a user, djbdns.
-
07-17-2009, 01:40 PM #19Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Posts
- 569
-
07-19-2009, 01:39 AM #20Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Nov 2003
- Location
- Lynnwood, WA
- Posts
- 438
-
07-19-2009, 01:50 AM #21Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Nov 2003
- Location
- Lynnwood, WA
- Posts
- 438
And in all those environments, a number of things are occurring if they have half a brain.
* Multiple servers that are sharding the DNS entries so that no one server is responsible for ALL of the entries, and no one server is ONLY responsible for an entry.
* Load balancing to split the requests across all those servers.
Now neither of those is a BAD idea; the problem is with BIND they're required. How long does it take you to start bind cold with 250,000 domains? I know over here with very reasonable hardware it takes forever.
While that's not necessarily a game stopper when you've got a farm of DNS servers that can pick up the slack after one crashes, what happens when through some fluke, an invalid entry gets tossed to all the DNS servers at the same time (as I've seen happen), crashing them all simultaneously?
On PowerDNS, you'll be serving requests again within seconds of a restart.
On BIND, you'll be serving requests again when it feels like it, and you'll be sitting there watching it load and constantly querying it, praying this time it responds while your boss breathes down your neck asking why the DNS servers still aren't up and customers are still complaining even though you were "on the problem" a half-hour ago.
-
07-19-2009, 02:05 AM #22New Member
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Posts
- 4
I feel Bind would be the best, but its a bit heavy. Go for some other only if your server resources are limited and if it is going to server large number of Zones.
-
07-19-2009, 02:27 AM #23Intangible Asset Appraiser
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- Austin Tx
- Posts
- 2,007
I second that.
I've used bind for the last 15 freekin' years in all kinds of situations, and extremely, extremely heavy loads. I've had little to no problem with it at all. And I've tried just about everything out there over the years, "just in case".
Some folks just don't like using mainstream anything, and will speak out against such regardless. Mostly teens, early 20s. But, as an expert bind admin, I can tell you it does handle load. If your NS hierarchy is going to be hammered, of course there are steps to optimize, but this would be the same for basically any service.
If you are loading 100K+ zones, you MAY want to spread it a bit...would you put 1000+ web sites, even on the worlds best serving software, on one instance? No. You would load balance it in some way. Just like any service.
If it didn't handle it, would you trash it to no end? If my employee's were 1/2 as reliable as bind, I'd have it made.
MSDNS, now THERE's a server that can't handle much....This is the best signature in the world....Tribute!
(It is not the best signature in the world, no. This is just a tribute)
-
07-19-2009, 03:16 AM #24Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- NYC / Memphis, TN
- Posts
- 1,454
lol Actually the guy you were responding to had said it was forked. Which means they created a branched development off of the existing product. (Heavily modified BIND)
I also agree with many of the folks above. BIND is crap for more than 10,000+ records. NEVER EVER use BIND for such a configuration
If it didn't handle it, would you trash it to no end? If my employee's were 1/2 as reliable as bind, I'd have it made.
PowerDNS or djbdns all the way.≈ PeakVPN.Com | Complete Privacy VPN | Cloud Hosting | Guaranteed Security | 1Gbps-10Gbps Unmetered
≈ PeakVPN | 31 VPN Servers | 17-Years Experience | Emergency 24/7 Support
≈ Visit us @ PeakVPN.Com (Coming SOON) | ASN: 3915
-
07-19-2009, 04:15 AM #25New Member
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Posts
- 4
thanks guys this seems to help me a lot, i am pondering over asking him to go with djbdns,
Which one does afraid.org use btw??
Similar Threads
-
server problem (Child Server number on Apache Server) PLEASE HELP!
By SparkyHost in forum Dedicated ServerReplies: 10Last Post: 11-11-2007, 09:46 AM -
3+ Server Cluster, 1TB File Server, 10M (3,240G xfer) Included, $99/Server
By alias_willsmith in forum Dedicated Hosting OffersReplies: 7Last Post: 08-28-2007, 05:40 PM -
Windows server side anti spam for Windows 2003 server with Matrix SMTP Mail Server
By brian2000 in forum Dedicated ServerReplies: 0Last Post: 12-04-2006, 03:55 PM -
Server Administration / Server Security / Initial Server Setup -- Low Rates.
By DME-Geoff in forum Employment / Job OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 03-13-2006, 12:23 AM -
HelpSpeed.com - 24x7 Server Admin + Server Monitoring. We solve all Server Problems.
By whitecollar in forum Employment / Job OffersReplies: 1Last Post: 08-24-2005, 10:55 AM