• Re: AW: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the service renamed from bind9 tonamed?

    From Ted Mittelstaedt@tedm@ipinc.net to bind-users on Fri Jul 17 10:56:51 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.protocols.dns.bind


    Your personal experience is not the gobal truth. It is your opinion but other experienced pepole see it different than you.


    Hmm I'm a bit late to this discussion but I will chime in with the
    others. The service always was called "named" pronounced "name Dee"
    it was called that in the Nutshell book which is easily the
    authoritative book on the subject, it was called this before you were
    born and it was kind of the height of hubris for it to ever be named
    bind9 in a software distro.

    In fact, the ONLY reason that the name "bind9" was ever even coined at
    all was because the changes from bind8 both in the syntax of the config
    file and how the program operated they wanted to boot admins in the
    behind to get them to change their config files. It should have been
    put to bed as a name a long time ago, or named "bind version 9" like
    every other software program does with their versions.

    So as an experienced person who has been doing this you-nuxs thing since
    1982 - I DON'T see it different - and in fact, I see it as a RETURN to
    what it originally was!

    Ted
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Dennis Clarke@dclarke@blastwave.org to bind-users on Sat Jul 18 13:29:35 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.protocols.dns.bind


    So as an experienced person who has been doing this you-nuxs thing since
    1982 - I DON'T see it different - and in fact, I see it as a RETURN to
    what it originally was!

    Exactly ! Hear hear ! Well said.

    --
    Dennis Clarke
    RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
    UNIX and Linux spoken
    GreyBeard and suspenders optional
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Ted Mittelstaedt@tedm@ipinc.net to bind-users on Mon Jul 20 10:45:21 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.protocols.dns.bind



    On 7/17/2020 11:35 AM, John W. Blue wrote:
    Speaking about things to be annoyed over ..

    I am still ticked that FreeBSD dropped BIND from the distribution for something called unwinding or whatever it is.


    I'm not happy that happened either but the simple fact is that if BIND
    would quit dropping support so fast for it's older versions that never
    would have happened. The fundamental problem was that BIND dropped
    support for it's older versions before the distros dropped support for
    their distros. This is happening with a lot of other software packages.

    When FreeBSD was used mostly for servers it wasn't a problem. But more
    and more people are using it for desktop use where they want to
    basically install it and forget about it, never run patches, never give
    a fig about security. Simpler programs like Unbound have less code
    and so less things to go wrong, need less patches, and are easier to
    support for a longer period of time so they get supported for a longer
    period of time. Also, Unbound's main purpose in life is as a caching
    dns program. Nobody who runs a server on FreeBSD uses Unbound.

    Ted

    John

    -----Original Message-----
    From: bind-users [mailto:bind-users-bounces@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Ted Mittelstaedt
    Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 12:57 PM
    To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
    Subject: Re: AW: Debian/Ubuntu: Why was the service renamed from bind9 to named?


    Your personal experience is not the gobal truth. It is your opinion but other experienced pepole see it different than you.


    Hmm I'm a bit late to this discussion but I will chime in with the others. The service always was called "named" pronounced "name Dee"
    it was called that in the Nutshell book which is easily the authoritative book on the subject, it was called this before you were born and it was kind of the height of hubris for it to ever be named
    bind9 in a software distro.

    In fact, the ONLY reason that the name "bind9" was ever even coined at all was because the changes from bind8 both in the syntax of the config file and how the program operated they wanted to boot admins in the behind to get them to change their config files. It should have been put to bed as a name a long time ago, or named "bind version 9" like every other software program does with their versions.

    So as an experienced person who has been doing this you-nuxs thing since
    1982 - I DON'T see it different - and in fact, I see it as a RETURN to what it originally was!

    Ted
    _______________________________________________
    Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

    ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.


    bind-users mailing list
    bind-users@lists.isc.org
    https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users _______________________________________________
    Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list

    ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.


    bind-users mailing list
    bind-users@lists.isc.org
    https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Ted Mittelstaedt@tedm@ipinc.net to bind-users on Mon Jul 20 12:05:53 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.protocols.dns.bind



    On 7/20/2020 11:23 AM, Michael De Roover wrote:
    If that is true, I hereby lost all faith in humanity.. well whatever
    faith I had left. This has been going on for like half a decade now.


    Nobody ever went broke catering to the human desire for ease....
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113