dnsmasq vs. bind

[Shayne Patton]

Jonathan Hutchins wrote:

>On Friday 06 February 2004 07:12 pm, Shayne Patton wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I was just wondering if any of you have any experience with dnsmasq.  
>>    
>>
>
>I've had a masqueraded network for years now.  My mailserver's NT4 with 
>Exchange 5.5, but I can do SMTP from within the firewall.  I forward external 
>HTTP to a webserver behind the firewall.
>
>I used to run this with diald on a dial-up connection, but I went broadband as 
>soon as TW had it available.
>
>I don't have any idea what you mean by Masq vs. bind.  I run a Berkeley DNS 
>server on the firewall itself, caching for external, private for internal.  
>Internal network gets DHCP and WINS from the NT4 box.  
>
>As far as scaling goes, you want very fast RAM - for larger networks a 
>dedicated appliance probably works better.  For a moderate size office, up to 
>say half a class C, a 200MHz Pentium should be adequate.
>
>
>  
>
Thank you for the response.  I know what hardware i need to run, rather 
what hardware I have to work with and to what extent it will scale and i 
have a 300mhz for the firewall/router machine which i will probably run 
the dns on as well.  What I was referring to was an actual alternative 
to BIND or Berkley's dns, or (4give the usage :-) ) windows dns.  
http://thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/doc.html & 
http://freshmeat.net/projects/dnsmasq/?branch_id=1991&release_id=148819 
.  I don't need anything HUGE, but enough to handle (w/ relative ease) 
up to 50 clients.  I know the hardware is up to it because I did it with 
bind (actually only 34 clients that time) and even 2kserver, though I 
had more ram at that point.