caching-namserver

[Bob Goodwin]

*Les Mikesell wrote:*
> *On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 08:09, Bob Goodwin wrote:
> *
>> *John Miller wrote:
>> *
>>> *Bob Goodwin wrote:
>>>   
>>> *
>>>> *;; Query time: 58 msec
>>>> ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
>>>> ;; WHEN: Tue Aug 22 08:21:44 2006
>>>> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 212
>>>>
>>>> However, I never see single digit delays!
>>>>     
>>>> *
>>> *This isn't going to help much, except as another data point, but I tried
>>> 'dig google.com' just out of curiosity.  The first response took 66
>>> msec; here's the second:
>>>
>>> ;; Query time: 2 msec
>>> ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
>>> ;; WHEN: Tue Aug 22 08:52:20 2006
>>> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 212
>>>
>>> My machine is nothing special (Athlon 1<>2 GHz). 
>>>   
>>> *
>> **Yes, I considered that it might be this ancient box, but it can ping
>> itself in less than 100µs!
>>
>> I intend to try it on one of the faster computers I have but this is
>> my primary box.  An old Pentium III 450 mHz w/~400 megs of RAM.  And
>> this is the one I am most interested in, everything I do seems to be
>> done here.  So maybe single digit times are out of the question?
>> *
> *
> I get 3 msec on a dual PII 450 on the 2nd query for
> www.google.com:
>
> ;; Query time: 3 msec
> ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(localhost)
> ;; WHEN: Tue Aug 22 08:37:06 2006
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 180
> *
*I wonder if my system may be introducing unanticipated [by me] delays? 
I am assuming that the DNS process is internal to my computer once an
address has been cached however I have an ethernet switch, a wireless
bridge, and a wireless router that may be sneaking into the picture by
some means not obvious to me?

I have a system diagram at 
http://users.wildblue.net/bobgoodwin/system.png. 
The computer I am using is labeled box1.

BobG*