From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 3 05:00:14 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A2D916A417; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 05:00:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from skip@menantico.com) Received: from vms044pub.verizon.net (vms044pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.44]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3559E13C46C; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 05:00:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from skip@menantico.com) Received: from mx.menantico.com ([71.168.196.161]) by vms044.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JM60039TLVRRUJ7@vms044.mailsrvcs.net>; Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:59:52 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 01:05:20 -0400 From: Skip Ford In-reply-to: <46B1B496.4000504@FreeBSD.org> To: Doug Barton Mail-followup-to: Doug Barton , FreeBSD Current , FreeBSD Stable Message-id: <20070803050520.GA73382@menantico.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline References: <46B1AC75.9060907@FreeBSD.org> <20070802103459.GI59008@menantico.com> <46B1B496.4000504@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: FreeBSD Current , FreeBSD Stable Subject: Re: named.conf restored to hint zone for the root by default X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:00:14 -0000 Doug Barton wrote: > Skip Ford wrote: > > Just like I'd think everyone should sync with stratum-1 servers if > > those operators supported everyone doing that. > > I've already pointed out that this is a silly analogy, as the two > things have nothing in common. At the most basic level: > > Individual hosts don't need Everyone needs the root data > to sync with a strat 1 ntpd > > The strat 1 folks have asked The roots are open to all by design > people not to do that It really is an apt analogy. You don't see it because you believe the "roots are open to all". If they really were open to all, there would've been no objections to your change. The methods by which the data made available by the roots is available to all is well-defined, and AXFR isn't included in that definition. In fact, it's recommended against. -- Skip