From owner-freebsd-arch Mon Feb 19 10:13: 9 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from cosmo.jt.org (cosmo.jt.org [206.14.191.190]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6EDC737B491 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 10:13:05 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 98264 invoked by uid 1000); 19 Feb 2001 18:12:34 -0000 Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 10:12:34 -0800 From: Dan Peterson To: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DJBDNS vs. BIND Message-ID: <20010219101234.A98114@danp.net> References: <200102190547.WAA12829@usr05.primenet.com> <3A90CA94.D7CBCB65@softweyr.com> <20010218233916.J28286@lizzy.bugworks.com> <3A9149CC.7A1FADB8@softweyr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3A9149CC.7A1FADB8@softweyr.com>; from wes@softweyr.com on Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 09:29:00AM -0700 X-PGP-Key: http://danp.net/pubkey.asc Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Wes Peters wrote: > But with BIND, you the user can fix them. You can do that with DJBDNS, too, > but you can't share your fixes with anyone else. http://www.djbdns.org > Dynamic DNS? I can't say I've ever used this. Sounds like another BIND klugde, though. It would probably be easier to write a simple script to edit your data file and rebuild data.cdb. RTFM at http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/tinydns-data.html . > DNSSEC? http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/forgery.html > Cache control and forwarding? RTFM at http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/dnscache.html . > and found that we could not distribute the modified versions Again, http://www.djbdns.org . > You seem to completely miss the fact that it's NOT DJB's code we really > object to, but rather the license. I don't really care about djbdns being in the base system; I just want people to stop spreading misinformation. -- Dan Peterson http://danp.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message