Hi Conrad,
On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 04:50:54PM +0100, Conrad Wood via BitFolk Users wrote:
On Fri, 2023-04-21 at 13:14 +0000, Andy Smith via
BitFolk Users wrote:
Over the last few days we've upgraded the
servers used for our
secondary DNS service and also switched software from PowerDNS to
BIND.
May I ask why? I have considered switching from BIND to PowerDNS many
times over the past few years (but never did).
Mainly that I'm a bit more comfortable with BIND and I realised that
unlike in ~2007 when I last evaluated this, BIND does now have the
ability to dynamically learn which zones to be secondary for
("catalog zones"), which was the only "advanced" feature of PowerDNS
that we were using.
The configuration of PowerDNS that we were using involved receiving
notifies and doing axfr just like BIND would and there was a known
deficiency there.
When a PowerDNS "superslave" receives a notify it does an SOA check
to get the serial number of the zone on the primary to compare with
its own. When acting as a DNS client PowerDNS does not support TCP,
so if the answer is truncated it treats it as no answer and refuses
to do an AXFR.
More details here:
https://strugglers.net/~andy/blog/2022/11/18/powerdns-truncated-soa-respons…
Also, I have been investigating some very occasional incidents where
a notify would get sent by a.authns but then one or more of the
PowerDNS secondary servers would simply log "timeout" for that
particular zone and not do the AXFR. They would then wait until
their refresh timer ran out to do a check and the needed AXFR.
I'm not 100% convinced that PowerDNS is the best choice for
conventional DNS replication by AXFR so I decided to investigate
BIND in that role. If I wanted an SQL database and the replication
within that then I'd definitely still stick with PowerDNS.
It is also possible that just upgrading PowerDNS would have helped
but it seemed like less work to deploy BIND as I already was
elsewhere.
Cheers,
Andy
--
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting