Re: BIND in the base (Was: Re: tmux(1) in base)

On Sep 22, 2009, at 1:07 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> I would be perfectly happy to remove BIND, however most people want
> some or all of dig, host, or nslookup in the base, which means that
> about 60% or more of the BIND source code has to be there to allow
> that. From there it's a pretty simple leap to "let's build it all then
> because that's how we've always done it."
>
> The next-best thing would be to flip the knobs so that we're not
> building named and friends by default which I'm happy to do if people
> want it done, but no one ever comes up with a clear consensus to do  
> it.

Ideally, FreeBSD out-of-the-box ought to have a caching DNS server
as part of the base system.  I don't understand myself why people don't
run caching name servers on every Internet-connected host, and want
to rely on some other external entity.  Heck, I run 'em on my nanobad
based systems on Soekris boxes; the footprint really isn't that large.

BIND serves this purpose adequately, though I'm sure that there are
endless other possibilities better/faster/smaller/cheaper/prettier..

louie