warren at kumari.net
Mon Jun 13 23:39:55 UTC 2011
On Jun 13, 2011, at 5:04 PM, Eivind Olsen wrote:
> Rick Jones wrote:
>> baby steps and all, but doesn't that line of reasoning lead to a call
>> for BIND to automagically update itself?
> I (sysadmin hat on) have no objection to BIND phoning "home" and somehow
> telling me it needs to be updated. In general. Depending on how it does it
> and how much information it leaks (Sun Explorer style dumps shipped
> outside, anyone? :)
Erm, maybe I missed this in the thread, but I'm assuming that there will be an option?
So for the folk who a: really want this or b: really don't can make their own choice?
Doesn't this do away with many of the concerns about implementing this? And now we can just have the fight about the default :-P
> I _do_ have an issue if BIND ever tries to auto update itself though, I
> hope it never happens.
> Eivind Olsen
> bind-workers mailing list
> bind-workers at lists.isc.org
More information about the bind-workers