nanog mailing list archives
Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded
From: Jeffrey Meltzer <meltzer () villageworld com>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 14:39:55 -0500 (EST)
Wrt the bind-members forum being discussed to death elsewhere, nobody can pay for early warnings. CERT will still be the source of early earnings. What people can pay for (bind-members participation) is the legal fees associated with NDA-level access to early fixes, if and only if they provide part of the internet's basic infrastructure (e.g., OS vendors and TLD server operators).
I'm confused. I get the TLD server operators part. But you're saying that you'd only give OS vendors access to this information. How long does it take, say, Sun, to issue a patch update? Wouldn't it be much more efficient, and useful, to issue the information directly to the people using the software? How many people actually use the default vendor binaries anyways? You're now playing favorites with your software, which many people have been using, and relying on, and helped you improve, for years. "Sorry, you're not important enough to get any security notifications fast. Good luck getting it when you get it". You stated "part of the internet's basic infrastructure". Explain how ISP's are not part of "the internet's basic infrastructure"? I mean, if you're going to charge for it, and have NDA's, why not allow anyone to pay for it? Depending on the price, if you're giving the info to "selected people", I know i'd pay for it (well, depending on the price). How do I know there's not going to be some script kiddie at Sun or somewhere that gets a hold of the information before I do, and doesn't care about an NDA? Why not just go the sendmail.com route, if you're going to start charging, and make it much clearer. "If you want support, etc, then pay us. Otherwise, it's just Open Source, use at your own risk". IE, *let* people make their own decision whether or not they feel it's worth the money. Think what's bothering me is that you're playing favorites, which, after so many people have been relying on bind for so long, just doesn't seem fair. But, I know, life isn't fair. All of a sudden this djbdns is starting to sound like an idea... Jeff -- Jeffrey Meltzer Sr. Network Administrator VillageWorld.com, Inc. SolarisGuide: http://www.solarisguide.com
Current thread:
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded, (continued)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Adrian Chadd (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Joe Rhett (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded mdevney (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Paul A Vixie (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Christian Kuhtz (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Bill Fumerola (Feb 24)
- RE: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded mdevney (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded jlewis (Feb 24)
- BIND, djbdns, commercialization jamie rishaw (Feb 24)
- genetic diversity w/ DNS bmanning (Feb 24)
- Re: genetic diversity w/ DNS ken harris. (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded J Bacher (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Joe Rhett (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded J Bacher (Feb 24)