[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: NMU'ing for wishlist bugs? (aka: intent to NMU bind9)



* Bob Proulx (bob@proulx.com) wrote:
> Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> [2002-09-16 18:52:02 +0200]:
> > I think that the majority of Linux machines have bind installed.  I don't 
> > recall the last time I installed Linux without bind, it would be sometime 
> > before 1996...
> 
> Agreed.  I consider bind locally a standard installation.  Over a
> thousand machines at my employer and each run a local bind daemon with
> a forwarding configuration to our top level servers.  We tried
> switching from that to a centralized DNS server but there were
> problems with centralization and we switched back to having a local
> named.  BIND is designed to be distributed and works well that way.
> There are many reasons to run a caching name server.  Here are a
> couple.

There are alot of reasons to not one run too.  There is no overriding
reason or need for named to have an entry in base-passwd.  It's simple
enough for the package to add the user.  Even ssh does this, and for
much the same reason.

	Stephen

Attachment: pgpSEHnIZv5FA.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: