Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 4 Jul 2012 17:51:52 +0100
From:      "Simon L. B. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-security@freebsd.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Dag=2DErling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Pull in upstream before 9.1 code freeze?
Message-ID:  <CAC8HS2Hx%2BqV1zYSzyM6wYzbyA6BStd3HEwc-VDhv40DHM=qCvw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FF35864.5030109@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <CA%2BQLa9B-Dm-=hQCrbEgyfO4sKZ5aG72_PEFF9nLhyoy4GRCGrA@mail.gmail.com> <4FF2E00E.2030502@FreeBSD.org> <86bojxow6x.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4FF35864.5030109@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 07/03/2012 05:39, Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav wrote:
>> Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> writes:
>>> The correct solution to this problem is to remove BIND from the base
>>> altogether, but I have no energy for all the whinging that would happen
>>> if I tried (again) to do that.
>>
>> I don't think there will be as much whinging as you expect.  Times have
>> changed.
>>
>> I'm willing to import and maintain unbound (BSD-licensed validating,
>> recursive, and caching DNS resolver) if you remove BIND.
>
> You've got a deal!
>
> Unbound requires ldns, which is a good thing. Part of this project would

How's the security support for ldns / unbound? For third party
software sitting in the 'frontline' that part is rather important.

> also be to enable drill so that we have a command-line dns lookup tool
> in the base, but that's trivial once you've got ldns imported.

Does that means loosing host(1) ? That would be somewhat annoying.

--=20
Simon



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAC8HS2Hx%2BqV1zYSzyM6wYzbyA6BStd3HEwc-VDhv40DHM=qCvw>