RHEL, Centos, Fedora rpm vs ISC bind versions

Michael Hoskins (michoski) michoski at cisco.com
Mon Jul 16 07:26:15 UTC 2012

-----Original Message-----

From: Drunkard Zhang <gongfan193 at gmail.com>
Date: Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:29 PM
To: Eivind Olsen <eivind at aminor.no>
Cc: "<bind-users at lists.isc.org>" <bind-users at lists.isc.org>
Subject: Re: RHEL, Centos, Fedora rpm vs ISC bind versions

>2012/7/16 Eivind Olsen <eivind at aminor.no>:
>> Den 15. juli 2012 kl. 16:57 skrev Benny Pedersen <me at junc.org>:
>>> change to gentoo/funtoo ?
>> Some might prefer to run the same Linux distribution on all their
>>servers, changing to something like Gentoo just to get BIND running
>>seems a bit overkill.
>For critical services, I advice you to run different distros of Linux,
>or at least different version of same distro. And fixing of bind in
>Gentoo is extremly timely, generally within 48 hours when a bug
>Debug is easy too, you can easily add RESTRICT="-strip" to disable
>final strip, so you got debugable binaries. ;)

hmm, sure...  but if you're going for genetic diversity, why not throw BSD
into the mix?  or run dedicated appliances with vendor support (you did
say critical)?  don't forget to change the hardware architecture.

oh, wait, that wasn't the point of the original post...  so suggestions to
change OS or platform aren't really useful here and sort of hijack the

since no one's said it publicly to the OP yet -- thanks.  each OS will
have its zealots, and diversity certainly makes sense in some scenarios...
 but i appreciate the effort and feel such things add value for the BIND

ps: we build our own packages to provide the (in)famous "ITIL DSL"...
however, doing so requires time and expertise.  the fact someone offered
up their resources to help BIND users (it might not meet YOUR need, but
it's useful for some) should really be recognized and not used as an
advocacy podium best whipped in $os-users.

More information about the bind-users mailing list