On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 05:53:37PM +0100, Toni Mueller wrote: > > I DO NOT WANT TO CONVERT MY ZONE FILES. I WANT TO USE THEM AS-IS. > > There is only one Unix way to use them (fortunately), and that's BIND.
no, there is at least one other unix nameserver that reads them. NSD. http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/nsd/ i haven't yet done enough research on this to know whether it's any good or not. it certainly looks good as an authoritative-only nameserver with a BSD license. > You don't seem to listen to the large number of arguments that have > been brought forward against the BIND format, and in favour of just > about any other format. there have been no arguments brought forward against the bind zonefile format. a few people have claimed that it sucks but without providing any reason or evidence. djbdns doesn't support it and djb doesn't like it - that means that it's broken, right? why, then, did that file format work for years before djbdns came along? the worst that can be said of it is that there were some minor differences in it between bind version 8 and version 9 - and even then, the difference was that bind 9 was more strict in it's requirement for correctly formatted files. this incompatibility was documented. > You also choose to ignore the tools available to manipulate the > applications data, whether stored in a data base, LDAP directory, or > in a text file, anyway. because i prefer plain text files, i am "ignoring" certain tools? what universe do you live in? > > What is so difficult to understand about this simple concept? is it > > just that djbdns can't do it, therefore it must be wrong? > > No, all other Unix DNS software I am aware of can't do it as well. NSD. > There could be a reason in _that_. laziness? ignorance? an irrational compulsion to reinvent wheels that work well enough (i.e. Not-Invented-Here syndrome)? > How do you think about the multitude of SQL- and LDAP-backed DNS- (or > anything-) servers out there? That's all crap because they don't work > with BIND zone files and sendmail.cf? try arguing against what *I* say, not what you claim that i say. i really don't like people stuffing words into my mouth. for one thing, it's annoying. for another it's a sign of a feeble mind unable to argue effectively that finds it easier to argue against their own words than mind. > > i've performed more upgrades and software & hardware transitions > > than you could even imagine - they have been successful transitions > > precisely > > Then you know the value of a lab, and if you're worth your money, you > have one, too. No need to break production systems. Take your time to > check it out beforehand... of course i research stuff on other machines first. that's why and how i know that djbdns is not suitable for my needs, and why i know that it's zonefile format sucks. if you had bothered reading what i posted, you would have noticed me mentioning (on several occasions) that i have run djbdns on several machines over several months. > > because i am cautious about radical changes to the point of being > > paranoid and plan everything out before i start, including a disaster > > recovery plan for reverting to the previous working config. i am > > Me too. So you've tested all things thoroughly in your lab, then > roll the change out. What's the problem? the "problem", since you insist that there must be one, is that djbdns is inadequate for my needs and there is currently no viable alternative to bind. personally, i have no major problem with this. i'd prefer it if there were a decent alternative, but there isn't. > > how do i know that you're a newbie? your shrill insistence that you > > have all the answers is a dead giveaway. > > There are still some who insist that only punch cards can give you > long-term reliable data storage. You're one of them. fuck you too, arsehole. you want to make it personal, you'll get fucking personal. craig -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
