Telstra Infiltration?

[Daniel Mons]

Frode Egeland wrote:
>> Wow .. there is *no* reason at all to install bind?
> 
> If it's installed as a caching dns server, that might be a benefit?

BIND is not limited just to people hosting DNS services.  It's
lightweight, and works perfectly fine as a read-only caching DNS server
that resolves directly from root nameservers.

What do you think 99% of Australian ISPs use to cache domain names they
don't own or control?  BIND, of course.

BIND's default install sets it up to resolve names directly from the
root nameservers (bypassing any of Telstra's or any other ISP's inbuilt
stupidity), and is set to cache by default.  Installing it requires zero
configuration other than setting your DNS to point to localhost (a
trivial task, even for home users).

Considering this thread has gone on for dozens of posts now, installing
BIND seems like a perfectly valid fix to bypass all of Telstra's DNS
idiocy. Don't confuse the fact that people use BIND for so much more
with it being inappropriate for low-end, single-user, cache-only setups.

-Dan

PS: This post sent to you by my ISP's SMTP server, with it's name
resolved by a caching-only BIND9 install on a Linux machine.