Re: djbdns: An alternative to BIND

[Paul Vixie <vixie () vix com>]

niek () asbak coding-slaves com (Niek) writes:

> One could also put together a list based on:
> - Security holes.

in BIND9-- zero so far.

> - Amount of code

in BIND9--

  % find . -name '*.[chyl]' -print | xargs wc -l | awk '{X+=$1} END {print X}'
  687674

> - Bloatness

in BIND9-- none.

> - Seperation of functionality

in BIND9-- you got me on this one, we have one daemon that does everything.

> - # of seconds it takes to load huge amounts of zones

in BIND9-- you got me on this one.
in BIND9.3.1-- better but not good enough, BIND9.4 will be better still.

> In the end, it all comes down to religion:

no.

> Bind people don't ack djb points and vice versa.

i don't ack djb's existence, not merely his "points."

i'm happy to ack your points, and debate them, though.
-- 
Paul Vixie