Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 02:35:47 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@des.no> Subject: Re: Replacing BIND with unbound Message-ID: <503204F3.7060803@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1208200918300.78446@ai.fobar.qr> References: <CAL409Kzjjaur5%2B1gGh7VtTdg5M1zjLpZ-kmm8%2BrWv%2Bw9ua%2B14A@mail.gmail.com> <5031FAAB.9020409@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1208200852420.78446@ai.fobar.qr> <5031FF67.80000@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1208200918300.78446@ai.fobar.qr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/20/2012 02:19, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > On Mon, 20 Aug 2012, Doug Barton wrote: > >> On 08/20/2012 01:55, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: >> >>> We will continue to reject this until there are more firm plans, >>> proper documentation on the security support side, which I cannot >>> remember Simon got an answer for. >> >> I gave a clear answer. If there are any pieces missing it's up to Simon >> to follow up with Dag-Erling. > > If you did, where was it. My email client shows 1 follow-up to > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2012-July/039837.html > and that was unrelated and not you. You don't get to comment on the discussion if you're not going to follow the discussion. :) It's not up to me to advocate for the inclusion of unbound in any case, that's up to Dag-Erling. My point is simple ... BIND is not a good fit for the FreeBSD base, and it needs to go. The fact that we not only have a solid replacement for it ready to go, but a willing maintainer, is a bonus. 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)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?503204F3.7060803>