[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       djbdns
Subject:    RE: A real PITA (was: RE: DNScache uses way more sockets than BIND)
From:       "Mike Batchelor" <dnscache () bv ! to>
Date:       2000-06-29 3:42:15
[Download RAW message or body]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Owen [mailto:gowen@SoftLock.com]
>
> 	That being the case, it might be _better_ to have dnscache at the
> far end of the WAN link.  That way your clients make one query to dnscache
> over a thin link, then dnscache makes multiple queries without being
> bottlenecked by the WAN link, and sends a single response down
> the WAN link.
>
> 	Anybody have any thoughts on this?  This is all speculation and no
> profiling.

That's an interesting suggestion.  I'll have to think about that one. :)

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]