On 16/11/11 13:07, Warren Kumari wrote:
It was (very convincingly!) explained to me that INSISTS() are only
used for the "this should not happen" cases, and if the INSISTS()
were not there, many of the recent attacks may have led to much worse
things like buffer overflows / more worrying security issues (and
that the push for INSIST() was directly from this sort of thing in
8.x…).
I tend to agree with this kind of reasoning.
It might be good if bind were able to re-start itself, rather than dying
outright (e.g. re-exec the process) but that is dangerous too; it's
better done by an unrelated supervising process.
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
