NS record question
jim at rfc1035.com
Wed Mar 28 17:00:23 UTC 2001
>>>>> "Bill" == Bill Larson <wllarso at swcp.com> writes:
Bill> I, personally, will consider BIND-9 ready for production
Bill> server use when the root name servers are also using it. I
Bill> figure that they know what their requirements are, including
Bill> security, performance, and managability. I figure that my
Bill> server requirements, other than performance, can't bee too
Bill> different than theirs.
This is absolutely sensible and reasonable. I have made the same point
in the past and will do so in the future. "Run what the root servers
run" is generally a very good policy. Modulo Bill Manning's reasonable
point about widening the DNS software gene pool.
However there are some performance problems in BIND9 that only a root
server would care about. This is a major reason why none of the root
servers run BIND9 yet. Another is the thread locking problems which
should be fixed by 9.1.1. The "newness" of BIND9 doesn't help either
Even so, naive and beginning admins should be pointed at BIND9. This
should save them from picking up the bad habits that BIND8 tolerates.
Bill> Give us a break with your implications that BIND-9 is the
Bill> ***ONLY*** server to use.
I don't believe anyone from Nominum has said or even implied that. In
another posting yesterday I said "stick with BIND8" because the
original poster didn't have the time to become familiar with BIND9 and
was happy to stick with BIND8 which had served him well. And still
More information about the bind-users