> 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)