No subject

>From suter  Fri Nov 30 14:36:14 2001
Return-Path: <majordom at caliburn.humbug.org.au>
Received: from diadora.client.uq.net.au (diadora-2 [10.0.1.2])
	by zwitterion.humbug.org.au (8.12.1/8.12.1/Debian -2) with ESMTP id fAU4aENT022550
	for <suter at zwitterion.humbug.org.au>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:36:14 +1000
Received: from caliburn (mail at caliburn.humbug.org.au [203.15.51.6])
	by diadora.client.uq.net.au (8.12.1/8.12.1/Debian -2) with ESMTP id fAU4aD05010888
	for <suter at zwitterion.humbug.org.au>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:36:13 +1000
Received: from majordom by caliburn with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 169f5C-0000ad-00
	for <general-outgoing at lists.humbug.org.au>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:15:26 +1000
Received: from gw.gbch.net ([203.143.238.93] ident=rvhizq)
	by caliburn with smtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 169f58-0000aY-00
	for <general at lists.humbug.org.au>; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:15:22 +1000
Received: (qmail 57975 invoked by uid 1001); 30 Nov 2001 14:15:20 +1000
X-Posted-By: GJB-Post 2.23 27-Nov-2001
X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.2-RELEASE i386
X-Uptime: 8 days, 20:20
X-Location: Brisbane, Australia; 27.49841S 152.98439E
X-URL: http://www.gbch.net/gjb.html
X-Image-URL: http://www.gbch.net/gjb/gjb-auug048.gif
X-GPG-Fingerprint: EBB2 2A92 A79D 1533 AC00  3C46 5D83 B6FB 4B04 B7D6
X-PGP-Public-Keys: http://www.gbch.net/keys.html
Message-Id: <nospam-1007093720.57936 at bambi.gbch.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 14:15:20 +1000
From: Greg Black <gjb at gbch.net>
To: general at lists.humbug.org.au
Subject: Re: [H-GEN] caching nameserver 
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011130100040.00a98c20 at mail.optushome.com.au> <nospam-1007084599.50701 at bambi.gbch.net> <3C06ECEB.2060809 at optushome.com.au> <nospam-1007089628.54469 at bambi.gbch.net> <3C06FD6A.8080700 at optushome.com.au> 
In-reply-to: <3C06FD6A.8080700 at optushome.com.au> 
	of Fri, 30 Nov 2001 13:30:50 +1000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general at lists.humbug.org.au
X-Loop: general at lists.humbug.org.au
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo at lists.humbug.org.au?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:general at lists.humbug.org.au>
List-Subscribe: <mailto: general-request at lists.humbug.org.au?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: semi-serious discussions about Humbug and Unix-related topics <general at lists.humbug.org.au>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto: general-request at lists.humbug.org.au?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://archive.humbug.org.au/humbug-general/>
Sender: Majordomo <majordom at caliburn.humbug.org.au>
Status: RO
Content-Length: 3751
Lines: 88

[ Humbug *General* list - semi-serious discussions about Humbug and  ]
[ Unix-related topics.  Please observe the list's charter.           ]
[ Worthwhile understanding: http://www.humbug.org.au/netiquette.html ]

Robert Kearey wrote:

| > If you have some facts, by
| > all means share them.  However, be certain to explain why all
| > the CERT advisories I get are wrong; and be sure to explain why
| > the people who are having trouble with BIND-9 are incorrect in
| > their problem reports.
| 
| What, the same CERT and bugtraq advisories I get? Nothing too scary 
| there as far as I can see.

That's a matter for you to determine.  I may have a stricter
approach to security-related issues than you do.  Certainly,
from my point of view, BIND is too risky -- BIND-8 is full of
security holes; BIND-9 is just too new to trust.  Other people
will almost certainly weigh these factors differently.

| I've had no trouble with BIND 9. We (Red Hat) have had no trouble with 
| it - at least, no more than any other major bit of software infrastructure.

For me, no trouble at all is the goal.  I've met that with
djbdns and failed with BIND.

| Methinks I touched a raw nerve. Perhaps there's a reason you're chafing 
| so badly.

I'm not chafing at all.  I certainly have no vested interest in
seeing djbdns spread.  I really do like to see alternative
implementations of major infrastructure software, because I
think we all benefit from that.  The fact that people can choose
qmail or postfix as alternatives to sendmail is a good thing.
The fact that they can switch to djbdns is also a good thing.
If there was a third DNS implementation available, that would be
even better.

| > I, together with many other people, have been using djbdns on
| > various networks for ages and have nothing but praise for it.
| > That's actual experience, not somebody spreading FUD, which is
| > what you appear to be doing with your post.
| 
| Um - no. I'm talking right now to the ex-technical manager for APNIC. 
| I'm inclined to trust his judgement.

Fair enough.  I put more trust in my own judgement, but that's
my choice.

| > If you have specific issues with djbdns, take them to the djbdns
| > mailing list and let people address your concerns.
| 
| I think you mean "flame you to a cinder for having a point of view 
| disimlar to The Great Dan".

Many people (me amongst them) have really strong disagreements
with Dan Bernstein.  He usually ignores me, but whenever he does
notice my existence, it's only to flame me for having the
temerity to think differently from him.  (To be honest, I think
he's as easy to like as strychnine in your soup.)  However, I
don't ever let my personal opinions of software authors'
personalities influence my choices of the software I use.  Many
good software developers are jerks in person, but that doesn't
make their code bad.

If somebody else had come up with the first viable alternative
to BIND, I'd have tried their offering first.  They didn't, so
I'm using djbdns.

And, whatever your mate from APNIC thinks, the fact is that
there are several very large ISPs and very large networks that
rely completely on djbdns -- they have stuck with it because it
works.

But, for all the BIND fans, I have no problem with people making
the choice to go with BIND.  I'd just hate it if everybody used
BIND because they thought it was the only game in town.  It was,
but it's not so any longer.

I think we've strayed far from the list's charter now, so I
won't add any more to this thread unless it seems to be really
necessary.

--
* This is list (humbug) general handled by majordomo at lists.humbug.org.au .
* Postings to this list are only accepted from subscribed addresses of
* lists 'general' or 'general-post'.