[34368] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (J Bacher)
Sat Feb 3 22:55:27 2001
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 20:58:38 -0600 (CST)
From: J Bacher <jb@jbacher.com>
To: Joe Rhett <jrhett@isite.net>
Cc: Jeffrey Meltzer <meltzer@villageworld.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20010203164347.E6636@isite.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0102032056320.5432-100000@ns.shawneelink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> > I'm confused. I get the TLD server operators part. But you're saying
> > that you'd only give OS vendors access to this information. How long does
> > it take, say, Sun, to issue a patch update? Wouldn't it be much more
> > efficient, and useful, to issue the information directly to the people
> > using the software? How many people actually use the default vendor
> > binaries anyways?
>
> Just about every very large company that I've ever worked with. Also,
> having spent numerous years working the NAVSEA and other Pentagon systems,
> you are explicitly not permitted to install anything other than a
> vendor-provided patch.
>
> My god, are there really this many idiots out there that don't grasp how
> the world works?
Good. Reduce yourself to insults and don't even answer the [first]
question.
