NS record question
jim at rfc1035.com
Wed Mar 28 14:53:09 UTC 2001
>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Vance <bobvance at alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
Bob> 1) there is a learning curve on the processes and features.
Bob> I know that it seems ridiculous, but my time is very much
Bob> precious lately, and taking time to read the migration doco
Bob> and figure out changes for starting and stopping and 'rndc'
Bob> and keys, yada yada, is not something I want to do right now.
Well fine. Stick with BIND8. Lots of folk are still running BIND4 for
the same reasons. BTW the "learning curve" with BIND9 is pretty small.
It's trivial if your zone files are in good order.
Bob> If I could just compile and go, like with new BIND8 releases,
Bob> I'd be glad to install and run it to test it.
BIND9 was designed to slavishly follow the protocol specs. This means
that backwards compatibility with BIND8 for some things simply was not
an option: like illegal zone files.
Bob> 2) we have the impression that BIND9 is not stable given the
Bob> frequency of RC releases.
The point about release candidates is to provide sort of beta-test
versions prior to the actual release. It's not unreasonable for them
to shake out more bugs, especially on the more obscure OS platforms.
So what would you prefer, less frequent release candidates or more
prompt fixes to the bugs they uncover? And when a new release
candidate comes out, the notification lists the changes. If none of
them affect you or your platform(s), then you can just stick with the
release candidate that works for you. The next upgrade can be done
after the actual release is made.
Bob> it just makes sense for me, personally, to wait until BIND9
Bob> appears more stable.
... for your definition of "stable". For some folks, BIND9 already is
stable. Or stable enough.
More information about the bind-users