Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/dist/bind
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.org>
From: George Michaelson <email@example.com>
Date: 12/03/2003 11:01:16
On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:55:21 -0800 Chuck Yerkes <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Quoting Rick Kelly (email@example.com):
> > Chuck Yerkes said:
> > >Me? I bailed on BIND 8 long ago and run BIND 9 in a chroot.
> > >OpenBSD added some nice patches which do things like open /dev/null
> > >and /dev/zero BEFORE chrooting so I don't really need much in
> > >that env.
> > Yup, I've been running BIND 9 for about two years now. I'm currently
> > running BIND 9.2.3 on an SS5 running 1.5.4_ALPHA.
> Which leaves me with "why is BIND 8 still part of NetBSD?"
for the same reasons the install makes a split / and /usr :-*
> Invalid reasons include "it's proven" (yes, and orphaned now too)
> It's not longer supported; it's missing several Good Things. BIND 9
> *is* slower (bind 4 is fastest, djdns is next, then BIND8 then BIND 9).
nsd is faster than bind-4 IIRC. compiled zones win.
> If you're not doing mail blasts or running AOL's DNS, you likely
> don't care (and frankly, if you are, a 4CPU machine with 8GB of
> RAM will perform better with BIND9 and still costs less than a week
> of a really good consultant).
with this, I concur. 9 is fine as a platform for anybody who does less than 1000
q/sec in DNS, and for most people who do 1k or more, they understand what they
are doing and design complete systems to cope.
we run 9 to serve reverse-DNS for the AP region. It works.
George Michaelson | APNIC
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org | PO Box 2131 Milton QLD 4064
Phone: +61 7 3367 0490 | Australia
Fax: +61 7 3367 0482 | http://www.apnic.net