[THIN] Re: configuring BIND for use as DNS with Win2k3 Terminal Server?
- From: "Braebaum, Neil" <Neil.Braebaum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:14:48 -0000
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Kenzig Kenzig.com
> Sent: 13 January 2005 19:38
> To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [THIN] Re: configuring BIND for use as DNS with
> Win2k3 Terminal Server?
>
> Well if you already have W2K3 which it sounds like you do, it
> really is not an extra cost as DNS is a service part of W2K3
> server package which you have already paid for.
That's true, but cost isn't always strictly a problem at this level
anyways.
Presumably, the choice of BIND means he already has the UNIX
infrastructure, therefore, likely BIND isn't a cost option, either.
> I'm still confused as to why you want to use a non MS product
> to do naming services in an MS environment in the first
> place.
Well I can't speak for the OP, but what I would suggest as valid
arguments:-
1. BIND *is* a technically superior product.
2. Environments rarely tend to be purely Microsoft.
3. BIND in many cases has already been used for DNS for some time, so
the question for many installations is why change - BIND *should* be
capable of serving the name resolution requirements.
Of course there are options - AD usage can be delegated to Microsoft DNS
- so using a hybrid model. Or it can all be replaced with one or the
other DNS product.
But as a DNS administrator, I'm often frustrated by the lag with which
Microsoft DNS has with functionality compared with BIND releases. And
when you have to face both internal platform name resolution, e-commerce
and external and internal DNS relationships, you'd be surprised at how
soon you can come up against the limitations of differences of the DNS
products.
> If you are really that concerned about security there
> have been just as many exploits in bind as there have been
> with DNS and the open source community takes just as long to
> create a fix as does MS. They all are going to have their bugs.
I'm not sure I buy that - BIND as a product is much more up-to-date than
Microsoft DNS on functionality or features front. As to patch releases,
to be honest, I've never really compared the two, on those grounds - but
most of those type of patches tends to be more OS related - and all the
big OS vendors tend to be reasonably good on security patches, these
days.
Neil
***********************************************
This e-mail and its attachments are confidential
and are intended for the above named recipient
only. If this has come to you in error, please
notify the sender immediately and delete this
e-mail from your system.
You must take no action based on this, nor must
you copy or disclose it or any part of its contents
to any person or organisation.
Statements and opinions contained in this email may
not necessarily represent those of Littlewoods.
Please note that e-mail communications may be monitored.
The registered office of Littlewoods Limited and its
subsidiaries is 100 Old Hall Street, Liverpool, L70 1AB.
Registered number of Littlewoods Limited is 262152.
************************************************
********************************************************
This Weeks Sponsor SeamlessPlanet.com Domain Names
Register your .com domain name for as low as $7.85
One of the lowest prices on the web! Part of The Kenzig Group.
http://www.seamlessplanet.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
ThinWiki community - Awesome SBC Search Capabilities!
http://www.thinwiki.com
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm
Other related posts:
