Re: djbdns: An alternative to BIND

[Niek <niek () asbak coding-slaves com>]

On 4/9/2005 4:03 AM +0100, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> No IXFR, no automatic notification of bind slaves (you get to run a
> separate notify script) ...
No RFC requires a specfic system of notification.
Seperate notify scripts are ok, rsync is even better!
Oh wait, does bind support rsync ?

> But yes, it is far easier to use, consumes very low amounts of memory
> and makes an excellent local resolver cache e&oe no roundrobin DNS
> without a patch (as in it returns all the A records in the same order
> every time, whereas bind does this in a different order ...)
Bind should patent this.

> No v6 support without a patch either 
>
> Oh yes, patch, patch ... welcome to patching hell if you run qmail or
> any other djb ware :)
Yeah we tech folk hate patching.

As I mentioned earlier, djb - non-djb is a religion thing:
rfc-wise, feature-wise (bind supports something, tinydns should too).

Niek Baakman
--