From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 21 17:39:06 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D78106564A for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 17:39:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6581C14E919; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 17:39:06 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5033C7BB.1040702@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 10:39:07 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" References: <5031FAAB.9020409@FreeBSD.org> <86a9xobo2c.fsf@ds4.des.no> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.3 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= , FreeBSD Hackers Subject: Re: Replacing BIND with unbound X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 17:39:06 -0000 On 8/21/2012 10:11 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > >> Doug Barton writes: >>> Dag-Erling, do you have a timeline for getting started on the >>> ldns/unbound import? >> >> I imported the code into the vendor tree, but did not proceed any >> further as there was still no firm consensus at the time. >> >> I believe the conclusion - to the extent that there was one - was that >> people were fine with tossing out BIND and importing ldns to replace the >> client bits, as long as we had suitable drop-in replacements for host(1) >> and dig(1), but there was no consensus on whether to import unbound. >> >> I'll start working on getting ldns into head this weekend. > > I think ldns really is not what we want; can you defer this for a week > and we could chat in person, also wtih brooks around, next week? > > There is a wwaayy larger thing to the picture of resolver libraries, > exspecially validating once, which includes standardization, > acceptance, application support, etc. and I admit there should be a > summary of that on the wiki but isn't yet as some of the things only > very last-weekishly materialized for real for us. Neither importing ldns nor removing BIND is going to have any effect on the stub resolver library in libc. And if you have much larger plans for resolver libraries, especially validating ones, it would be great if they were discussed IN PUBLIC, so that those of us who know a little something about the topic can be involved in the discussion BEFORE all the decisions are made, and all the balls start rolling. Thanks, Doug -- I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what I can do. -- Edward Everett Hale, (1822 - 1909)