Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:44:04 +0200
From:      "Ronald Klop" <ronald-freebsd8@klop.yi.org>
To:        "Mehmet Erol Sanliturk" <m.e.sanliturk@gmail.com>, "Daniel Kalchev" <daniel@digsys.bg>
Cc:        freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Bind in FreeBSD, security advisories
Message-ID:  <op.w01e3qhl8527sy@ronaldradial.versatec.local>
In-Reply-To: <51F7C07C.9060606@digsys.bg>
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>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:32:44 +0200, Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg>  
wrote:

>
> On 30.07.13 16:13, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg  
>> <mailto:daniel@digsys.bg>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     Going that direction, we should consider Comrade Stalin's maxim
>>     "FreeBSD exists, there are problems, here is the solution -- no
>>     FreeBSD, no problems!" :-)
>>
>>     Daniel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Then , there exists a new problem :
>>
>>
>> "There is no FreeBSD ..."
>
> We already know Comrade Stalin's solution had... bugs. Not before  
> millions parted with their lives...
>
> When/if we remove BIND from FreeBSD, we might find out whether that  
> solution has bugs, or not. Not until then, though.
>
> Back to the topic :)
>
> My take on this is that removing BIND from the base today is..  
> irresponsible. First, most who use FreeBSD expect an DNS server to be  
> readily available.

Interesting. What are your statistics of 'most' based on?

Ronald.

> Some people would just avoid to use any ports etc.
> BIND in base is well tested and known evil. If we are ever to replace it  
> with something else, that something else has to prove itself -  
> demonstrate that it is at least as good as BIND -- in the base system.  
> In practice, not in theory.
>
> This is very much an situation like replacing gcc with clang/llvm.  
> However, in the case of BIND we have no licensing problems, stability  
> problems, performance problems etc --- just concerns that BIND generates  
> many SAs -- which might be actually good indicator, as it demonstrates  
> that BIND is worked on.
>
> I personally see no reason to remove BIND from base. If someone does not  
> want BIND in their system, they could always use the WITHOUT_BIND build  
> switch.
>
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.w01e3qhl8527sy>