Hello there!
The need has arisen to move away from using third-party DNS servers on the internet and to raise our own DNS server. For this purpose, we will be provided with a Debian 6 server. One of the requirements for the server is that it must support IPv6.

There are two popular servers on the internet that can be used for this purpose: BIND and PowerDNS. We need a server that supports IPv6, does not require many resources, and does not require a GUI/WEB admin. However, there may be alternative solutions available, and we welcome all opinions, including negative ones.

Have a great day!

NSD or Name Server Daemon is a server that is utilized by three root servers. Its configurations are in bind style, and it can work only as a responsible server, which means that it cannot cache. NSD is an economical option for those who need a responsible DNS server.

On the other hand, BIND is a popular DNS server and there is a lot of dоcumentation available on it. In fact, approximately 80% of DNS servers use BIND.

I transitioned to PowerDNS some time ago for several reasons. Firstly, it supports a large number of backends, which includes databases, various NoSQL types, and even pipes. It also allows bind zones to act as backends.

Secondly, building a master-slave configuration is extremely easy on PowerDNS. There are two options available: either the backend itself worries about it (for example, the database in the master/slave), or a couple of settings in the configuration file. In contrast to Bind, there is no need to worry about creating a new zone on the master and slave, as this feature is all automatic on PowerDNS.

Lastly, PowerDNS is fast, reliable, and consumes minimal resources. I have not had any issues with it for two years, and it only takes up 50 meters in a separate OpenVZ container, without having to consume more resources.

However, configuring geo DNS-a can be challenging as it requires some manual handling. Although there is a geo backend available in the test, it is yet to be reliable. I have seen some dоcumentation on configuring pipes, but it is not significantly different from the Bind and can be complex.

In general, there are many DNS servers available, but Unbound stands out due to its unique features. Unbound is a recursive server and has the added benefit of caching. It was created by the same team that created NSD.

There is also YADIFA, which is similar to NSD and can only work in authoritarian mode. The .EU zone runs on YADIFA. These two servers are worth considering if you are looking for specific functionalities.

BIND (Berkeley Internet Name Domain) is one of the most widely used DNS server software on the internet. It has strong support for IPv6 and is known for its stability and performance. BIND can run on minimal resources, making it suitable for your Debian 6 server. Its configuration files allow for fine-grained control over DNS settings, making it a flexible choice for various network setups. With BIND, you can tailor the server to your exact needs without the need for a GUI/web admin, as its configuration can be handled via text files.

On the other hand, PowerDNS is another compelling option. It also boasts robust support for IPv6 and offers high performance. PowerDNS is designed with a focus on extensibility, and its modular architecture allows for different backends, enabling seamless integration with existing systems. While it may require slightly more resources than BIND, it remains a viable choice for your server. PowerDNS can be managed through its command-line tools, eliminating the need for a GUI/web admin interface.

When considering alternative solutions, it's essential to look at factors such as community support, security features, and long-term maintenance. Both BIND and PowerDNS have active communities and receive regular updates and patches to address vulnerabilities, making them reliable choices for your DNS infrastructure.
While both BIND and PowerDNS meet your requirements for IPv6 support, minimal resource usage, and absence of a GUI/web admin, the decision ultimately depends on your specific network needs, existing infrastructure, and team expertise. I recommend consulting with your technical team to evaluate the trade-offs and benefits of each option before making a decision. Our goal is to ensure that the chosen DNS server not only supports your current requirements but also aligns with your future expansion plans and technical roadmap.

I'd recommend PowerDNS as the ideal solution for a Debian 6 server that supports IPv6 and meets the requirements. PowerDNS is a lightweight, resource-efficient, and highly scalable DNS server that can handle large volumes of queries without breaking a sweat. Its IPv6 support is seamless, and it doesn't require a GUI or web admin interface, making it perfect for a server that needs to be managed remotely.

Another option is Knot DNS, a modern, open-source DNS server that's designed with IPv6 in mind. It's highly configurable, supports advanced features like DNSSEC and TLS, and is known for its high performance and reliability. While it may require more resources than PowerDNS, it's still a great option for a server that needs to handle a moderate to high volume of queries.