Bind9 or DNSMasq

Stuart Jansen sjansen at buscaluz.org
Tue Dec 21 09:18:18 MST 2010


On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 00:54 -0800, Make Compile wrote:
> Based on experience. what do you prefer with these two services? I
> have BIND9 running as local DNS server, I'm looking to have DNSmasq
> instead bind9 since it is more lightweight than bind. Any suggestions?

Bind is much more powerful, and therefore much more complicated. DNSmasq
has a simple config syntax, and integrated DHCP / TFTP making small
network setup almost trivial. For a home network I'd used DNSmasq. For a
corporate network I recommend Bind, assuming you're willing to do the
extra work to do take full advantage of it. For a small company, DNSmasq
is probably acceptable if you're not willing to setup Bind with split
views, subnets partitioned according to use, etc.



More information about the PLUG mailing list