From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 1 04:26:37 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: chat@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D078B16A420 for ; Sun, 1 Jan 2006 04:26:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.web-strider.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 198E943D55 for ; Sun, 1 Jan 2006 04:26:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from tedwin2k (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id k014TvP09479; Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:29:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Francisco Reyes" Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:26:32 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Cc: Kristian Vaaf , chat@freebsd.org Subject: RE: How to convert BIND to TinyDNS? X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 04:26:38 -0000 >-----Original Message----- >From: Francisco Reyes [mailto:lists@stringsutils.com] >Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 9:02 AM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: Kristian Vaaf; chat@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: How to convert BIND to TinyDNS? > > >Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > >> Why are you bothering? TinyDNS isn't the "standard" nameserver that >> everyone and their dog has been using for time out of mind. >The people >> that push it seem to like it because it's simpler > >I would have to disagree with that philosophy. >CCing chat.. since I am not actually adding anything of use to >the original >poster... > > >If that mentality prevailed better software, commercial or open source, >would never gain wide acceptance. Take for instance Postfix. >When Sendmail >was the total undisputed MTA, nobody would have bothered with >it... but it >was simpler than sendmail. > Not true. I am intimately involved in Windows servers and know a lot about Windows, but I still push FreeBSD every chance I get. And Windows is definitely simpler than FreeBSD. >The same applies with TinyDNS. For companies/users that have >simple needs >something easier to use/learn/maintain is a good thing to go for. > I'm not arguing that - but if they are taking over an existing BIND nameserver and they want to change it to tinyDNS - then they need to do it, not try to get the prior admin to do it for them. > >> so I think the onus is on the TinyDNS people to understand what the >> defacto standard is, not the other way around. > >Going back to the Sendmail vs Postfix example. The reason I went with >Postfix years ago was because it was totally different from sendmail. > And I'm sure that you demanded the prior guy that setup Sendmail to do the work building all your Postfix configuration files.....NOT! >If someone is happy with bind, great for them, but to say that >everybody >should be using it I didn't say that. I said: "...think the onus is on the TinyDNS people to understand what the defacto standard is..." Just because they understand it doesen't mean they have to use it. I understand Windows but do you think I use it for servers when I have a choice? >I think it's neither realistic nor healthy >for the Open >Source community. Often times the "Standard" servers do new >features because >some small program somewhere came up with a great idea that the >standard >program didn't have. > Quite true. But, not relevant I am afraid. I was not arguing people shouldn't try to best the defacto standard with their programs. But, before trying to -best- the defacto standard, they need to -understand- the defacto standard. >Lastly.. if we all would go with the "standard" there would be >no FreeBSD, >no open source... just windows. > I didn't say to "go with" the standard. I said to "understand the defacto standard" Big difference. Ted