Re: Way forward with BIND 8

From: Sean Chittenden (seanc_at_FreeBSD.org)
Date: 06/06/03

  • Next message: Andre Oppermann: "Re: Way forward with BIND 8" 
    Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:59:54 -0700
To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org

    > As most of you are probably already aware, there have been two
    > recent releases of BIND 8. Version 8.3.5 is the "bugfix, and new
    > minor features" release on the 8.3.x branch that we've currently got
    > in the tree already. 8.4.0 is (more or less) the "all the bug fixes
    > from 8.3.5, plus support for IPv6 transport" version.
    >
    > Because there are over 14k lines of diff between the source for 8.3.5 and
    > 8.4.0, I'm hesitant to import the latter right away. Instead, as the
    > nominal BIND maintainer, I'm proposing the following plan:

    Ummm... I hate to beg the question, but why have a nameserver in the
    default installation? All we need is the client resolver libraries
    and basic CLI programs. Using DHCP or HTTP as examples: we don't need
    dhcpd in the base, just dhclient, and with HTTP, we don't need apache
    in our base, but we do have/need fetch. The only reason I can think
    of that that would justify us having the nameserver in our base was if
    our /etc/resolv.conf shipped with 127.0.0.1 as the default
    nameserver... which it doesn't (there is no default resolv.conf, it's
    generated based off of user input!).

    If someone is running a dns cache or a dns server, then let them
    install from the ports and let us be done with our support nightmare
    of updating nameserver code or dictating policy for what nameserver
    our users should use by default. Updating server software via the
    ports is going to happen much more routinely for system administrators
    than software that is in the base. Removing the nameservers from our
    base also alleviates the project from future bikesheds regarding what
    to do when bind10 comes out midway through a major FreeBSD release or
    bind 9.43 fixes a bug, but isn't backwards compatible in some way
    (config file perhaps). This gives people a chance to install what
    they want and _maintain_ what they want, when they want ala the ports.

    Kill off most of the bind server bits and hold onto the client
    programs/libs in -CURRENT. Let 8.3/8.4 run its course in -STABLE, and
    urge people to use the ports if they're interested in newer DNS
    software. Having sysinstall install a bind[\d] package as an install
    option would likely result in more current bind installations than
    FreeBSD currently offers as most people stick with the defaults in the
    base system. Let's liberate our user base from using or feeling
    obligated to use out dated software by giving them a choice.

    -sc

    PS It'd probably be wise of us to create a new ports major category
    called "dns" that why all options are easily identified. 

    -- 
Sean Chittenden

  • Next message: Andre Oppermann: "Re: Way forward with BIND 8"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Network problem {start of part 2}
      ... fresh install using graphical expert install. ... nameserver 87.194.255.154 #modified from previous hostname valhalla ... router as a DNS resolver. ... I will progress through the upgrades slowly, ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: compensating for dhcp which only provides useless dns
      ... I have a new install of sid on a laptop with a new hard drive. ... wireless works fine except at one location where my guess is that ... the DNS is not set up correctly. ... useable nameserver addresses to /etc/resolv.conf. ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: dns.exe 2500 open ports in netstat -ab
      ... considering that this update is needed to remedy the DNS ... Install this update or do not install it ... and having a vulnerable DNS server.... ... I reinstalled the update and ports reappeared. ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.server.dns)
    • DNS troubles
      ... I'm trying to get a machine working, but it can't seem to handle DNS ... The previous install on this machine just worked. ... During boot up, after showing the network interfaces, until showing ... nameserver 4.2.2.1 ...
      (freebsd-questions)
    • Re: My FC3 machine appears to be compromised, please help
      ... Demon to correct the hacked entries on their nameservers, ... This will insulate you from your ISP's DNS issues and may actually result in improved performance for your mail server overall. ... remove the existing nameserver entries and add a "nameserver 127.0.0.1" entry. ... without having to install anything? ...
      (Fedora)