How to convert BIND to TinyDNS?
tedm at toybox.placo.com
Sat Dec 31 20:26:38 PST 2005
>From: Francisco Reyes [mailto:lists at stringsutils.com]
>Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 9:02 AM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: Kristian Vaaf; chat at freebsd.org
>Subject: Re: How to convert BIND to TinyDNS?
>Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
>> Why are you bothering? TinyDNS isn't the "standard" nameserver that
>> everyone and their dog has been using for time out of mind.
>> that push it seem to like it because it's simpler
>I would have to disagree with that philosophy.
>CCing chat.. since I am not actually adding anything of use to
>If that mentality prevailed better software, commercial or open source,
>would never gain wide acceptance. Take for instance Postfix.
>was the total undisputed MTA, nobody would have bothered with
>it... but it
>was simpler than sendmail.
Not true. I am intimately involved in Windows servers and know a lot
Windows, but I still push FreeBSD every chance I get. And Windows is
definitely simpler than FreeBSD.
>The same applies with TinyDNS. For companies/users that have
>something easier to use/learn/maintain is a good thing to go for.
I'm not arguing that - but if they are taking over an existing BIND
and they want to change it to tinyDNS - then they need to do it, not
try to get the prior admin to do it for them.
>> so I think the onus is on the TinyDNS people to understand what the
>> defacto standard is, not the other way around.
>Going back to the Sendmail vs Postfix example. The reason I went with
>Postfix years ago was because it was totally different from sendmail.
And I'm sure that you demanded the prior guy that setup Sendmail
to do the work building all your Postfix configuration files.....NOT!
>If someone is happy with bind, great for them, but to say that
>should be using it
I didn't say that. I said:
"...think the onus is on the TinyDNS people to understand what the
defacto standard is..."
Just because they understand it doesen't mean they have to use it.
I understand Windows but do you think I use it for servers when I have
>I think it's neither realistic nor healthy
>for the Open
>Source community. Often times the "Standard" servers do new
>some small program somewhere came up with a great idea that the
>program didn't have.
Quite true. But, not relevant I am afraid. I was not arguing people
try to best the defacto standard with their programs. But, before trying
-best- the defacto standard, they need to -understand- the defacto
>Lastly.. if we all would go with the "standard" there would be
>no open source... just windows.
I didn't say to "go with" the standard. I said to "understand the
More information about the freebsd-chat