I'm wondering if having so many entires would bog down the name resolution process.
Without a doubt. An intelligent hardware firewall will provide a much more efficient solution. Possibly your router is up to this job.
I doubt it. It's a Linksys WRT54G Wireless-G Router which has enough features to be fun to play with, but isn't as much fun as something rack mounted.
What always made me curious about the hosts file is: why is the IP address first? I would think that the hostname would be first followed by an IP address to map it to. In my mind, that would make it easier for the computer to parse through the text file. Right now there are thousands of "127.0.0.1" entries it has to look through before coming to the hostname.
Raptor, my hosts file is a little over 2,000 KBytes. I've attached it to this post. Its actually in two parts to circumvent the 250k attachment limitation. Control-c and control-v work nicely.
You can try it for yourself and see if it causes problems.
Here is an intersting page about large hosts files, the problem that they can allegedly cause, and a purported fix:
http://www.ericphelps.com/scripting/samples/Hosts/ In the article, it is suggested that you disable the DNS client service. Sounds interesting. I'll give it a try when I have a spare minute or three. In the meantime, does anyone else have any leads on hosts file size?
Thanks,.
--Oober