nanog mailing list archives

Re: djbdns: An alternative to BIND


From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra () baylink com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:57:08 -0400


On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 04:53:26PM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
"Empirically" is because BIND9 attempts to detect other BIND9 servers, and
if it thinks the other server isn't BIND9, then it uses the traditional
protocol. So it will work so long as no implementation can fool BIND9 into 
thinking the other server is BIND9, but then not implement the 
non-standard protocol.

Well, not to put too fine a point on it, Dean, why in he|| would you
want to *do* something that silly?  Since the only identifiable reason
to pretend to be BIND9 *is to get that protocol modification*, if you
can't do that protocol, and you claim to be BIND9 anyway, you seem to
deserve what you get.

Cheers,
-- jr 'what was the subject of that sentence?' a
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra () baylink com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

      If you can read this... thank a system administrator.  Or two.  --me


Current thread: