Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 10:49:48 -0800 From: Doug Barton <DougB@DougBarton.net> To: John Hay <jhay@icomtek.csir.co.za> Cc: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.cc>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/bind FREEBSD-Xlist Message-ID: <3C68124C.957FEE0D@DougBarton.net> References: <200202061514.g16FE3A70349@zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Hay wrote:
>
> > > > nectar 2002/02/04 13:28:45 PST
> > > >
> > > > Added files:
> > > > contrib/bind FREEBSD-Xlist
> > > > Log:
> > > > Give the next BIND-importing schmuck some assistance.
> > > >
> > > > Revision Changes Path
> > > > 1.1 +37 -0 src/contrib/bind/FREEBSD-Xlist (new)
> > > >
> > > Does it mean you're willing to maintain BIND from now on?
> >
> > s/from now on/for now/
> >
> > I don't mind being the schmuck for a while. Someone has to.
>
> What about going to v9.x?
I'm still vigorously opposed to this. While bind 9 _may_ provide more
security because it's written from scratch, it may also provide more
security problems for the same reason. It definitely underperforms bind
8 as a resolving name server because of EDNS0, and a few other things.
If someone comes up with a compelling argument that has more substance
than, "It's the latest thing, so we should use it," I'll be more
interested. Personally, I think that in this case we're better off with
the devil we know. Users who want bind 9's features can use the ports.
Doug
--
"We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power.
And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory."
- George W. Bush, President of the United States
State of the Union, January 28, 2002
Do YOU Yahoo!?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C68124C.957FEE0D>