[clue-tech] Caching-only BIND problems (long winded)

[chris fedde]

On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Bruce Ediger <bediger at stratigery.com> wrote:
> I decided to set up a "caching only" name server on my local area network.
> It's giving some problems, and maybe someone could advise?
>
> I've tried to put all the relevant details below, but it seems a bit
> long-winded, and at the same time, inadequate.
>

Bottom posting.  hope you don't mind.

A caching name server is a service for local clients.  I'm not sure
why you want internet udp port 53 packets to go to the caching host.
There would be no reason for internet clients to use a caching only
server.

Typically you would configure your DHCP server so that it provides the
caching server's IP address so you dhcp clients route their requests
to the caching name server who in turn follows internet resolving
rules or uses a forwarder to get answers on behalf of its clients.

There is not much value to running bind as a caching only server in a
small network.  Most of the time it is fine to just use your bandwidth
provider's name server.  An exception would be if you want your
internal clients to resolve DNS names for internal hosts.    In my
opinion Bind is more server than is needed for this.  dnsmasq is a
nice small easy to configure server that provides caching, static
mapping. and dynamic updates.  It is a great solution for a SOHO
config of 10 to a couple hundred clients.

One key is to be sure that all static DNS clients use the "right" name
server.  Sometimes you need the router/NAT box to be able to resolve
inside names.

Another critical issue is to ensure that the DHCP server has the right
domains in the search list.  This gets a bit ugly for windows clients
since they seem to have trouble accepting a search list from dns.

In any case.  If you choose BIND or dnsmasq or another nameserver they
typicaly have pretty good logging and it is worth your while to
explore how this logging data can help you figure out what's breaking.

YMMV
CRF