[openbeosnetteam] Re: r18408 moved to network
- From: Oliver Tappe <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeosnetteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 23:09:29 +0200
On 2006-08-12 at 20:41:57 [+0200], Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Oliver Tappe <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > Well, we have BIND as part of our libnetwork.so, in the dns/
> > > > subfolder.
> > > > I think Waldemar originally ported it.
> > > Yes, I ported BIND, but Philippe once mentioned some better
> > > resolver
> > > (djbdns or tinydns?) which is less buggy and has a simpler
> > > codebase:
> > > http://cr.yp.to/djbdns.html
> > > http://tinydns.org/
> > Yes, I personally am all for replacing bind with a simple dns-cache.
> > We don't
> > need the server part anyway (at least not the real thing) and the
> > code has a
> > bad reputation by now anyway...
>
> That's indeed true. Even though the client part alone is probably not
> that crucial. In any way, I would not think that this is a very urgent
> thing to solve, at least if BIND still runs okay in our new stack :-)
Yes, there's more important stuff to do, you're right.
> > I am not sure if we could use djbdns easily, as when I looked at it
> > very
> > briefly today, it gave me the impression of depending on other pars
> > of Dan
> > Bernstein's software suite. Another possibility would be to use
> > dnsmasq, but
> > that is GPL, I don't know if that rules it out...
>
> LGPL would be okay, but since all net apps would need to link against
> that code, and at the net_server as well, I wouldn't think GPL is an
> option.
> How many other parts would djbdns need, anyway?
I don't know yet, sorry. I thought I had read something in the docs along
those lines, but when I tried to compile dnscache just now, it was pretty
straightforward.
So we might choose to switch to dnscache, later, but for now bind should do.
cheers,
Oliver
Other related posts:
