[nsd-users] Plugins

[Damian Zaremba]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 03/28/2011 07:13 AM, W.C.A. Wijngaards wrote:
> Hi Damian,
> 
> On 03/28/2011 03:23 AM, Damian Zaremba wrote:
>> Looking though the changelog it appears the option for compiling plugins
>> as shared objects was added back in the 1. series however the only
>> example code/documentation I can find for writing them are totally out
>> of date and don't work currently.
> 
> There is no plugin support in NSD since the 3.0.0 release.  It was a
> feature that was not used, and thus not necessary.
> 
>> Does NSD 3.2 (.8 if it matters) support plugins and if so is there any
>> example code for them? The most recent example I can find is
>> http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/svn/nsd/branches/NSD_1_2/contrib/example-plugin.c which
>> clearly relies on the nsd-plugin header which doesn't appear to be in
>> the source tree much after the 2 release even though bug fixes to the
>> plugins appear in the change logs.
> 
> Because it was removed.
> 
>> The most recent entry in the change log as far as I can tell was
>> "dynamic plugin support (since 3.0.0)" on the 15th of Dec 06 - if there
>> is any documentation detailing things such as plugins apart from the man
>> pages that would also be good to know.
> 
>> Any pointers would be welcome (:
> 
> Did you know unbound has python plugins?
> 
> Best regards,
>    Wouter

Hi Wouter,
Thanks for the info - I agree there is little application for plugins
within the dns server it's self; I was going to use it for gathering per
zone statistics and possibly request modification for "geodns" style
features however it seems for performance people are using applications
such as DSC to scrape the queries directly from the network.

It would be interesting to see if anyone has implemented per zone or
even per record statistics down to a few min increments including things
like geographical location and what performance impact that has on the
response times - even if it is just a lot of queries to be parsed at a
later date.

As for unbound I have briefly looking at it and while it seems a decent
recursive server, however I am looking to implement a "cluster" of
authoritative servers to replace the current bind+pdns mix I have which
doesn't perform well under load.

Thanks,
Damian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=Q4Cu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----