Re: bind8 vs bind9
On Mon, 2002-11-18 at 19:39, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Tim Dijkstra <newsuser@famdijkstra.org> [2002-11-18 17:14:38 +0100]:
> >
> > Is there any reason to stick with bind8 other then convenience? I'm
> > asking this because bind9 seems pretty mature, but the default bind is
> > still bind8 I think...
>
> What is "convenient" about bind8? That is a serious question and not
> meant to be snide. Please educate me.
>
> With the many security advisories that have been posted against bind8
> recently I find bind9 much more convenient since I have not needed to
> update those servers as often.
>
> Perhaps you did not know that bind9 uses the exact same configuration
> file as bind8 in almost all cases? Unless you are doing something
> strange you don't need to change your configuration files at all.
>
> Bob
it's not that bind8 is better. it's just that it's more supported in
many distributions. I guess you don't want to manually compile bind
every time you get a security advisory so if you're using an OS that's
default to bind 8 (solaris, debian?, etc...) you may as well stick with
it, just make sure to update the binaries as they are released.
of-course if you need bind9 because of a reason, that's a different
matter.
btw, there are debs of bind9, so I guess it's supported as well. I'm new
to debian (just came back from solaris) so I don't know why there are
both versions. maybe someone here knows more about the reasons...
Bye
--
Haim
Reply to: