On Sun, 2014-04-13 at 16:10 +0930, William Brown wrote:
A system wide resolver I am not opposed to. I am against a system
In this case, a cache *is* helpful, as is DNSSEC. But for the other
cache is a severe detriment.
About the above 2, can you explain *why* ?
A bunch of people here, feel that it would be a great improvement, you
keep saying it is doomsday, yet I haven't seen a concise explanation of
why that would be (maybe I overlooked, apologies if so).
I disable the DNS cache in firefox with developer tools.
So you will be able to do the same by setting 1 configuration option in
unbound, or you could disable the resolver entirely.
Can you tell why *everybody* should have the cache disabled by default ?
Additionally, a short TTL is good, for this situation, but it
Paul mentioned the single configuration option need to make your
resolver tweak the TTL locally, what else do you need ? And again why
your preference should be the default ? What compelling arguments can
you make ?
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York