Maintained by: NLnet Labs

[Unbound-users] unbound views

Leen Besselink
Tue Aug 11 15:24:34 CEST 2009


On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 02:55:45PM +0300, Artis Caune wrote:
> 2009/8/11 W.C.A. Wijngaards <wouter at nlnetlabs.nl>:
> > Easier to deploy two servers, one for internal, one external.
> > Changing the code to have two unbounds internally that it chooses
> > from based on source IP would be bloat I think.
> >
> > Who needs different resolving for internal and external?
> > Names on the internet are names on the internet, right?
> 
> We also used bind views, but now we use two instances of unbound.
> Views don't really differ from two servers, every view eats it's own
> memory and act just like two separate servers but two servers gives
> you more flexibility.
> We don't have to touch unbound just to change internal/external acl's,
> just change firewall tables and you're done. :)
> 

(I didn't read the whole discussion)

Maybe it's a good idea to have the one for external be the forwarder
for the one for internal, that safes on queries to the internet.

We do something similair.