If you want to see the “aa” flag (and the default 130 second TTL) you need to query the authoritative servers of that zone. For example “dig @a.ntpns.orgbe.pool.ntp.org”. Other than that, the caching you have seen is how DNS works and there’s nothing unusual in how the pool does DNS in this regard. DNS is a textbook example of how things scale to Internet scales, and caching nameservers is an important part of it.
I have stopped serving IPv6 from my home for Belgium.
But my other larger servers do that, stratum 2.
I did ask all my servers to be added to Belgium, sadly no response yet.
As I probably set the speed a lot higher when they all are assinged to BE as well.
However, my big server has been limited to 6mbit:
To prevent spikes.
I wonder how much load your IPv6 server is getting now.
I think you better check your own server for load, maybe show graphs?
I have no graphs running on that server. Sorry.
Had the IPv4 side of the server at 1.5GBit until roughly noon yesterday, I believe, to see whether the rate would keep increasing, and for potential comparison with @stevesommars’ server kept at the same rate through Saturday at least. Unfortunately some hiccups on the provider side, as visible in the graph, so not sure how reliable the data is.
IPv4 is fairly consitant in requests. But IPv6 spikes.
I not know why, I presume a lot of GSM traffic, where typical networktraffic is via Fiber/DSL/Cable and being consistant IPv4 by default.
But you set it very high, then you get the max requests. My tiny homeserver is set low, but gets spikes far beyond the setting. Even killing local networkspeed due to this.
I put the MikroTik back, as the Fritzbox wasn’t able to handle it. Wanted to test both, but the slowdowns happened again. NAT-table-overload, no other way to name it.
I wonder. If you just serve The Netherlands, nothing special, just set it the same. Will the same setting give the same requests?
No offense, there are other countries too, but NL is over-serviced. So to see what such speedsettings would do, would reveil a lot (in my opnion).
It would give much data to improve the pool of starving of servers and other countries over-served to share the load.
Ergo, what happens if you do the same to NL servers, if you can, without serving BE too.
Server is a chrony instance which is running on router itself. Don’t have a monitoring service running to collect statistics or create these nice graphs.
chrony serverstats gives over a 3.5 hr time period:
NTP daemon TX timestamps : 3095430
NTP kernel RX timestamps : 3095430
This translates to 246 NTPreq/s
Could it be that rates are still ramping up?
Current client distribution stats indicate that server IP is part of 2.7% of BE DNS requests but only contributing 5.5% of the bandwidth in BE zone.
For chrony, instead of those “RX/TX timestamps” fields, the “NTP packets received” and “NTP packets dropped” give a better view of the actual amount of traffic.