LinuxSA Mailing list archives

  From: David Newall <davidn@rebel.net.au>
  To  : Darryl Ross <dross@syc.asn.au>
  Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2001 18:23:36 +0930 (CST)

Re: BIND 8/9 Compatibility

> But, where do you try to stop being 'backward compatible' and introduce a
> new set of functions?

You might stop being backward compatible when the standard changes, but not
otherwise.

The resolver and Bind have nothing to do with each other excepting that
they both use the same standard.  These two programs (I use the term
loosely in the case of the resolver) are not even slightly the same.
They do completely different things.  One connects to a server and
asks questions of it; the other IS a server and answers questions.
What would happen if a new Sendmail required everybody to use a new Pine?
That's a very close analogy.  What would happen if a new Apache required
a new Lynx?  These things wouldn't happen, and I suspect (hope) that
David was mistaken when he said that the new Bind requires a new resolver.

> Sometimes you just need to start from scratch with a new system and forget
> about the old one.

I disagree.  Sometimes you need to start again from the standard definition
and forget about the old implementation.

-- 
LinuxSA WWW: http://www.linuxsa.org.au/  IRC: #linuxsa on irc.linux.org.au
To unsubscribe from the LinuxSA list:
  mail linuxsa-request@linuxsa.org.au with "unsubscribe" as the subject