I'm coming in late to this thread. We too are a hosting provider (small
time), hosting approximately 1600 live domains.
Not to say tinydns is a bad alternative, as it has it's strengths, but
we moved away from [outgrew] it 2 years ago.
I used to work for a messaging service provider and they had two
systems. The first system was the service provider offering its
messaging platform for its own domains and a hundred or so domains for
quite a lot of clients and these were managed with BIND by hand.
The other system was used for solely one client and that client is a
rather big Registrar, whom I shall not name, with thousands of domains
of which a good portion (over 50k) were hosted by this messaging service
provider since the registrar did not have its own messaging platform.
All these domains were automatically managed with tinydns.
So I do not know how you 'outgrew' tinydns. After all the only part that
involves tinydns is 'generate the cdb file from a database for tinydns
to chew' or in other words, generating the cdb file for tinydns is the
least of your problems to tackle.
The secondaries are handled just the same (actually, you do not need
'secondaries' anymore...if IIRC, you just have to rsync the cdb file
over so there is no real master/slave thing here)
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
