Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 16:29:21 +0200 From: Michael Grimm <trashcan@odo.in-berlin.de> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Bind in FreeBSD, security advisories Message-ID: <7cc4b6841ce070bef40ed28780ae00d6@mx1.enfer-du-nord.net> In-Reply-To: <1375193086.25610.3260371.08421FD0@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <CAO%2BPfDctepQY0mGH7H%2BgOSm4HJwhe-RCND%2BmxAArnRxpWiCsjg@mail.gmail.com> <1375186900.23467.3223791.24CB348A@webmail.messagingengine.com> <51F7B5C7.6050008@digsys.bg> <CAOgwaMt4G02yhU0cbiq_EEwhi4=mgt2kLGJf0Rgb8t9wECsGJA@mail.gmail.com> <51F7C07C.9060606@digsys.bg> <1375193086.25610.3260371.08421FD0@webmail.messagingengine.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2013-07-30 16:04, Mark Felder wrote: > Unbound/NSD are suitable replacements if we really need something in > base, and they have been picked up by OpenBSD for a good reason -- > clean, secure, readable, maintainable codebases and their use across > the > internet and on the ROOT servers is growing. +1 I switched two years ago and disabled bind in /etc/src.conf. Thus, I could skip some followup-work regarding SAs in the past multiplied by the number of servers involved. Regards, Michael
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7cc4b6841ce070bef40ed28780ae00d6>