Nameservers

[bob at sinister.com (Bob Keyes)]

That's what I am using here. I have mixed feelings about it. I had used
bind for such a long time that the configuation file had become second
nature to me and I had to learn a new scheme, which was annoying.
Secondaly, I am having some issues with one of my nameservers and I am not
sure that tinydns is not the source of the problem. But it is certianly
fast and lightweight. Due to the odd licensing scheme, it can't be
packaged as a binary alone. In debian, it's easy enough to grab the build
package with dselect, and then have debian patch, configure, and compile
it.

On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Robert La Ferla wrote:

> FYI - If you are using Linux for your router, try tinydns
> (http://www.tinydns.org)  It can use the root servers so you don't have
> to bother with ATTBI or whatever.  It's much more secure too.  BTW -
> citysearch.com and other large sites use it for it's performance and
> security.  It also has a significantly smaller footprint than BIND thus
> the name tinydns.
>
> Robert
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://www.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>