On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:55:21 -0800 Chuck Yerkes <chuck+nbsd@2003.snew.com> wrote:

> Quoting Rick Kelly (rmk@toad.rmkhome.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

-- 
George Michaelson       |  APNIC
Email: ggm@apnic.net    |  PO Box 2131 Milton QLD 4064
Phone: +61 7 3367 0490  |  Australia
  Fax: +61 7 3367 0482  |  http://www.apnic.net