Replacing BIND with unbound

[Doug Barton]

On 8/21/2012 10:11 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> 
>> Doug Barton <dougb at FreeBSD.org> writes:
>>> Dag-Erling, do you have a timeline for getting started on the
>>> ldns/unbound import?
>>
>> I imported the code into the vendor tree, but did not proceed any
>> further as there was still no firm consensus at the time.
>>
>> I believe the conclusion - to the extent that there was one - was that
>> people were fine with tossing out BIND and importing ldns to replace the
>> client bits, as long as we had suitable drop-in replacements for host(1)
>> and dig(1), but there was no consensus on whether to import unbound.
>>
>> I'll start working on getting ldns into head this weekend.
> 
> I think ldns really is not what we want; can you defer this for a week
> and we could chat in person, also wtih brooks around, next week?
> 
> There is a wwaayy larger thing to the picture of resolver libraries,
> exspecially validating once, which includes standardization,
> acceptance, application support, etc. and I admit there should be a
> summary of that on the wiki but isn't yet as some of the things only
> very last-weekishly materialized for real for us.

Neither importing ldns nor removing BIND is going to have any effect on
the stub resolver library in libc.

And if you have much larger plans for resolver libraries, especially
validating ones, it would be great if they were discussed IN PUBLIC, so
that those of us who know a little something about the topic can be
involved in the discussion BEFORE all the decisions are made, and all
the balls start rolling.

Thanks,

Doug

-- 

    I am only one, but I am one.  I cannot do everything, but I can do
    something.  And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what
    I can do.
			-- Edward Everett Hale, (1822 - 1909)