[linux-elitists] DJB ruckus du jour
Wed Nov 13 15:49:44 PST 2002
begin Michael Bacarella quotation:
> I realize that some folks have personal beef with him but
> this is just getting silly.
> 1. Offsite nameservers are somewhat ineffective unless you have other
> offsite services as well. Not worth the liability if they're not
> needed, IMO.
> One of the most common name resolution problems I've debugged has
> to do with third party nameservers giving out bogus information.
This is 100% true. I used to have all sorts of trouble with
people not being able to get to zork because of a flaky backup
nameservice provider. But if zork were actually down, the nameservice
would go down too. What benefit did I really have that zork's
nameservice would continue on even if it went down? You still
wouldn't be able to get to zork anyway.
In fact, the functioning secondary nameservice made me lose
sight of the fact that the primary was non-functional for quite some
But the backup nameservice is nice now, because it means that
mail for zork gets spooled in one location at the backup MX now,
meaning that it's just one transfer to get it all delivered when it
returns. Also, that MX is handy when peoples' routing snafus make
zork inaccessible but the backup MX and nameserver are still live.
So it's useful, but not the required staple that many make it
out to be for all situations.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
More information about the linux-elitists