nanog mailing list archives
Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded
From: Bill Fumerola <billf () mu org>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 17:45:15 -0600
On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 02:37:10PM -0800, mdevney () teamsphere com wrote:
The category "OS vendors" gets a little fishy... Do Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox get on the list if they sign the NDA? How about Patrick Volkerding? Someone like Microsoft or Sun obviously qualifies, but with respect to Open Source OSes, fact is *everyone* is an OS vendor at some level.
Most open source OS projects have a defined leadership and possibly a security team or a security officer, so determining who qualifies should be a simple enough task. I offer my condolences to whoever at ISC has to determine which of the seven billion Linux distros they consider large enough to warrant membership. -- Bill Fumerola / billf () FreeBSD org
Current thread:
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded, (continued)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Patrick Greenwell (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded jamie rishaw (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Patrick Greenwell (Feb 24)
- RE: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Vivien M. (Feb 24)
- Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded Jeffrey Meltzer (Feb 24)
- 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)