- Previous message: Matt: "Re: [OT] Dns servers"
- Maybe in reply to: Bennett Todd: "Re: [OT] Dns servers"
- Next in thread: Craig Sanders: "Re: [OT] Dns servers"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
|
|
|
From: Craig Sanders (no email)
Date: Sat Jan 01 2005 - 17:57:55 EST
On Sat, Jan 01, 2005 at 01:37:57PM +0000, Bennett Todd wrote:
> 2005-01-01T10:55:23 Craig Sanders:
> > probably the three most important things missing are no tcp:53,
> > [...]
>
> You must be repeating someone else's uninformed criticism. djbdns of
> course supports tcp, always has, that's a basic requirement for
> either of the dns protocols.
no, i examined it myself a few years ago.
> > [...] no axfr, [...]
>
> always had that, too, client and server.
"always" isn't correct.
if it has these things now, it didn't back then.
btw, the manually-operated axfr-get doesn't cut it. even now it still can't
use axfr to automatically secondary a domain, and it ignores NOTIFY.
> > [...] and no ability to parse or use bind zonefiles.
>
> That, I think, can be forgiven, considering what a lousy,
> error-prone format it is, how much code is consumed trying to parse
> it, and that each major implementation parses it differently.
that's a complete load of crap. next you'll be repeating bernstein's nonsense
that his tinydns format is "human-readable".
> When you need to work with BIND format zone data, find out which
> version of BIND it's known to work with, use a temporary run of
> that version of BIND to parse it and publish it for axfr, then zone
> transfer it to tinydns-data's format with axfr-get.
if i've got to use bind to make djbdns work properly, why not just use
bind?
> > > djbdns implements a useful and safe subset, correctly.
> >
> > except for the bits that he doesnt like....which especially includes
> > anything that facilitates inter-operation with non-djb software.
>
> Bizarre. I've got to assume you haven't tried to use it or read
> anything about it, to make statements like this. Almost no install
you'd be assuming wrong, then. my loathing of it is *precisely* because i
tried to use it as a replacement for bind, and ran headlong into djb's
usual idiocies - bizarro-world configuration, crappy startup & reload system,
squillions of tiny & magic(*) config files with only one config element each,
and his insistence that i throw away years of work and experience to
re-implement everything in his One True Way.
(*) i.e. mere presence of a file with a particular name enabled a feature.
this is brain-damaged. amongst other problems, it makes it impossible to
comment-out a feature while you're trying something new, you have to delete it
rather than just comment it out as a reminder of what the config used to be.
craig
-- craig sanders <> (part time cyborg) my postfix scripts are at http://taz.net.au/postfix/scripts/
|
|
|