nanog mailing list archives
BIND 9 (Re: ISC Patches)
From: Paul Vixie <vixie () vix com>
Date: 17 Sep 2003 17:46:19 +0000
I know you aren't favorable to doing the work internally to ISC, but has anyone scoped out the effort involved in backporting this to BIND 8?
it's under consideration now. bind8 is not a priority for the bind forum, and isc would rather put it in feature-freeze, but we're looking into it. bind9's internals make "delegation-only" easy to implement. bind8's internals are pretty twisty.
I'm interested in that as well (BIND 9 as a recursive server on Tru64 doesn't work in my experience),
works fine here. bind9 is what f-root runs, and also all of our recursive servers, some of which are tru64. try it, you'll like it.
but I would suggest any discussion about that move over to the BIND list or the USENET gateway comp.protocols.dns.bind.
agreed, other than to clear up the above in the same forum where it was heard. -- Paul Vixie
Current thread:
- ISC Patches Peter Losher (Sep 17)
- Re: ISC Patches Todd Vierling (Sep 17)
- Re: ISC Patches Chris Adams (Sep 17)
- Re: ISC Patches William Allen Simpson (Sep 17)
- BIND 9 (Re: ISC Patches) Paul Vixie (Sep 17)
- Re: BIND 9 (Re: ISC Patches) Todd Vierling (Sep 17)
- Re: BIND 9 (Re: ISC Patches) Doug Barton (Sep 18)
- Re: ISC Patches Chris Adams (Sep 17)
- Re: ISC Patches Todd Vierling (Sep 17)