[79508] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: djbdns: An alternative to BIND
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher L. Morrow)
Fri Apr 8 23:05:43 2005
Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 03:05:20 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@mci.com>
In-reply-to: <4257363F.2070300@asbak.coding-slaves.com>
To: Niek <niek@asbak.coding-slaves.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sat, 9 Apr 2005, Niek wrote:
>
> On 4/9/2005 3:46 AM +0100, Nathan Ward wrote:
> > - I was forced to use DJBs naming conventions for zones
> If you administer 2-3 domains, sure it's an hassle, if not, put code-monkeys
> to work. Most script people I know love the tinydns zone structure in comparison
> to bind's one.
because instead of MX you have . or + or - or : or something so helpfully
meaningful... same for NS and A and CNAME... Yes, 1 more level of
indirection is not always a good thing.
-chris
(not that I dislike djbdns, i just don't understand why things have to be
'different' so very much... and if bind works, why use djbdns?)
