←back to thread

My Own DNS Server at Home – Part 1: IPv4

(jan.wildeboer.net)
220 points speckx | 3 comments | 05 Sep 25 19:08 UTC | HN request time: 0.05s | source
Show context
thedanbob ◴[05 Sep 25 21:05 UTC] No.45143600[source]▶
I set up authoritative nameservers at home using unbound, which appears to be considerably easier than configuring BIND, but I still can't say that I fully understand it. DNS (and networking in general) is a bit of a dark art.
replies(8): >>45144024 #>>45144179 #>>45144184 #>>45144578 #>>45144619 #>>45145306 #>>45146196 #>>45148030 #
icedchai ◴[05 Sep 25 22:03 UTC] No.45144179[source]▶
I've been running BIND at home since the mid 90's when I had ISDN. The O'Reilly "DNS and BIND" book was my go-to guide when I got started.
replies(1): >>45144661 #
1. gerdesj ◴[05 Sep 25 22:56 UTC] No.45144661[source]▶
It Still Does Nothing.

The sheer luxury of two B channels at 64kBps each and if you were cunning, the D channel at 16k (I wasn't cunning and didn't bother)! Yay, double phone charges if you raised the second channel. That was a BRI. A PRI was lots of channels (30) and an even more eye watering bill.

A customer dumped their BRI that was acting as a backup to SIP n that about six months ago. That's the last one I know of.

replies(1): >>45144787 #
2. icedchai ◴[05 Sep 25 23:10 UTC] No.45144787[source]▶
A trick some ISPs used in the 90's was a "data over voice" call, which ran at 56K but was charged voice rates instead of data rates. That meant the call was generally free. The improved latency of ISDN made a huge difference compared to a 56K modem.
replies(1): >>45147927 #
3. slow_typist ◴[06 Sep 25 09:48 UTC] No.45147927[source]▶
True, the nominal 8 k weren’t much of a change but the cut down on latency made a big difference especially while „surfing the web“.