[linux-elitists] anybody using non BIND dns?

Heather star@starshine.org
Thu Feb 1 18:17:08 PST 2001

> A couple of years ago I had a nice long talk with Paul Vixie (he was
> asking me -- or Cisco really for money so he was willing to put up
> with the indignity of talking to someone as clueless as me). He really
> doesn't fall into any of the common camps of "proprietary software
> advocate" "open source software advocate" or "free software
> advocate". He is his own animal and has values that really conflict
> with some commonly held "open source" or "free software" values. This
> really doesn't surprise me. I think that what we are seeing here is
> are two examples of Vixie's elitism. He is truly an "elitist".
> (Even though this list is supposedly comprised of "linux-elitists" we
> are all probably dramatically more egalitarian than Vixie. It is
> almost humorous that this discussion sprang up here on this list and
> that Heather's egalitarian values conflict with Vixies's elitistic
> values. Should we act like true elitists and throw Heather off of this
> list because of her egalitarian point of view?)
All OS' suck for different reasons.  All hardware sucks for different
reasons.  In our lives we classically merge so many things that suck it's
amazing we can boot up in the morning.

Thus my desire of and eventually advocacy for an OS that doesn't crash 
so often it has to boot up every morning.

I am cool whether y'all give a rats ass that I do cool things, or even
bother to mention htem, or not.

Curiously, I don't think that egalitarian and elite are opposites.

Feel better yet?  If not, keep reading, I've got the right bits set to
have fun with ya...

> The first example of elitism is with regard to working on BIND. Vixie
> honestly believes:
> 1) Very few people (all of which are well known to him) understand the
> idiosynchrocies of DNS and the associated RFC's well enough to make
> changes to BIND without fucking things up.
> 2) Virtually no-one is a good enough programmer to modify BIND without
> fucking it up.
> 3) Since items 1 and 2 are true there is no point in even looking at
> patches from someone unknown to him.

The only question then becomes how such a New Diva/Godling would become
known to him.  

The linux kernel list allows such godlings to converse, but also for clued
programmers and people with ... curious requirements ... to lurk so that
the end product ends up designed for the real world instead of godling
dream models of the world.  That an occasional lurker may actually be 
skilled enough to ascend to demigod status and submit patches or be trusted 
to commit themselves to maintaining a real chunk of code is almost chance
compared to the benefit of a good stiff dose of reality.

It doesn't keep them from having private working groups, getting together
for beer, and if they have an elite list somewhere as well, heck - good
for them.
> The second example of elitism is with regard to working with BIND. He
> also believes:
> 1) There are very few organizations which have a serious need to work
> with BIND. 

repeat after me:
"this list isn't tech support for people who can't read the RFC"

Sound like they have a failure to agree on meaning for the term "work with",
do we mean power-user I have 15000 hosts the internet will never see, or
folks who bang on code, or DNS monkeys who haven't finished grokking the
zone file sitting in front of them?   Category 3 should be fobbed off on
some GUI or or sold some expensive commercial offering to "hold their 
widdle hands for dem".  Everyone else should be able to be grownups.

> 2) It is perfectly acceptable to make an member's only organization of
> these elite users which affords them access to some extra support in
> the form of items 1-4 below. (he is an elitist after all)

Heh.  He could do that without bothering to take over a list that's
already extant.  We did.

Also, such elitism as we are describing here, is not about money, so a 
bunch of non qualified drones who don't belong on such a well-filled 
list thinking they can buy their way aboard sounds like a bug.

> 3) There is danger in sharing certain information such as security
> problems with the community at large.

security by obscurity is bull pockey and you know it.

discussing possible interesting design flaws/etc. that are not yet 
advisories and are about tweaking code bases or plotting the design 
of new features, is another thing, and it sounds fine that such stuff
could be on a private, even NDA, list.

But by the time it's an "advisory" - look out for this, and what class
of Nasty Issue it might raise - open your darn mouth, the more morons
out there that keep the bug in its live state is the longer you have
to put up with it being a bug.

> 4) Most of the people who use BIND are incompetent and supporting them
> is a waste of time.

see "not tech support".  I'm not even joking.

> 5) Allowing incompetent users on the same mailing list as elite users
> wastes the time of the elite users and chases them away.
> -ben

So, has the list they are talking about warping devolved to a tech support
for BIND list?  in which case why demean your elite crew by taking it from
the babies?  

btw, not having a list for your babies/end-users to live in reduces greatly
your ability to step down from Olympus once a while and express your godly 
splendour for them. 

* Heather *
And it should be the law: If you use the word `paradigm' without knowing
what the dictionary says it means, you go to jail.  No exceptions.
		-- David Jones

More information about the linux-elitists mailing list