From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ddb34e4ee5e28db0 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-04-18 05:01:35 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.cs.univ-paris8.fr!newsfeed.vmunix.org!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!news.iks-jena.de!not-for-mail From: Lutz Donnerhacke Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: BIND Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 12:01:34 +0000 (UTC) Organization: IKS GmbH Jena Message-ID: References: <20040414085518.06CE34C40D0@lovelace.ada-france.org> <87llkv344f.fsf@insalien.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: belenus.iks-jena.de X-Trace: branwen.iks-jena.de 1082289694 6179 217.17.192.34 (18 Apr 2004 12:01:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@iks-jena.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 12:01:34 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7305 Date: 2004-04-18T12:01:34+00:00 List-Id: * those who know me have no need of my name wrote: > in comp.lang.ada i read: >>The main problem with DNS is, that the specification does not really exists. > > surely the rfc's haven't disappeared. There is a difference between RfC and real world. In the case of DNS the difference is huge. No only cnsidering security issues. >>It is mainly specified by the BIND source code. > > bind is the canonical reference implementation. it is not intended that it > be the specification. Bind DNS handling differs from the spec. Nobody is interested in an incompatible version. DJB did this mistake and failed miserably. >>The main part is parsing old BIND configuration files. > > this is not terribly difficult -- each style (4.x vs 8/9) is well documented. Existing documentation does not imply easy to implement.