Date: Sun, 03 Aug 97 16:58:42 -0800 From: "Studded" <Studded@dal.net> To: "lists@tar.com" <lists@tar.com>, "Terry Lambert" <terry@lambert.org> Cc: "freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG" <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Moving to a more current BIND Message-ID: <199708032359.QAA21392@mail.san.rr.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 3 Aug 1997 15:54:54 -0700 (MST), Terry Lambert wrote: >On the specific issue of the most recent "bind", I have a problem. > >Someone has stated that their new "bind" is complaining about my >use of an alias record as the name of my DNS server. This has always been an error, but BIND 8.1.1 is more vocal about it now. TMK BIND 4.9.6 does not exhibit any differences in relation to this from the BIND 4.9.4 we had in the tree. In any case, what you're doing will still work, and 8.1.1 allows you to send those error messages to /dev/null if you like. >This is a bogus thing for it to do, since it is imperitive that >you be able to use a DNS rotor for DNS services, if you have >equivalent servers for reasons of fault tolerance. Without going into too much detail that's better left for bind-users@vix.com, a dns rotary is certainly not "imperative," and BIND is actually pretty smart about sending its queries to the one of your name servers that is in the best network position to it. >So I could live without the latest "bind" being in wide use until >that is corrected so that I can once again have my DNS server >have as high an availability as many WWW servers... I happen >to think DNS is a tad more important. 8-|. I submit that you are incorrect in a number of particulars.. feel free to write me if you'd like to hash this out some more. >In any case, it is a mistake to always grab the most recent >version of everything, and then try and jam it into a box with >"stable" written on the outside. New versions of things (bind, >in this case) are frequently *not* stable, and should not be >represented as such. I agree with this completely, however in the particular case of BIND, the ISC is making a concerted effort to support the 4.9.x branch in a way similar to our -stable. Their alpha and beta testing are quite good, and they take great care before they certify something for release. All the same, I'm not saying that the newest BIND should be plugged straight into the tree.. a shakeout period of a few weeks is always a good idea. In fact, I recommend the same for new releases of FreeBSD to people that ask me for my help with it. Shipping FreeBSD with BIND 4.9.4 for as long as we did was inexcusable however. Hope this helps, Doug The man who fears nothing, loves nothing.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708032359.QAA21392>