Re: My Introduction and current issues -
Nick Tait via bind-users <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.dns.bind9.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <6e778125-0030-492a-8077-42a0a96f9bad__18715.5648878374$1746942648$gmane$org@tait.net.nz> |
Sorry let me try again. I missed your other questions... On 11/05/2025 17:17, Fred Morris wrote: > BIND insists on addresses bound to interfaces (at least, that's my > contention, based on experience yesterday, which may or may not > reflect some reality which has been manufactured today). > > resolved uses a loopback address which is not bound to an interface > (at least that's my experience, which may or may not reflect some > reality which has been manufactured today). > > Nick, I'll ask before the fold: how do I explicitly bind 127.0.0.53 to > the lo interface before systemd starts? Not sure why you're asking. Systemd does this without you having to explicitly do anything. > > You know what? I'd like some features too. But I don't go around > binding to addresses which are not bound to interfaces. Never. I just > don't do that. Venturing close to the "political" line: I don't see > anything in BIND which even hints at a whiff of dbus. > >> ... > > From where I sit it looks like it sits on an unbound address to shim > into established, conformant, admittedly baroque and crenellated > mechanisms for managing name resolution... I actually laughed when you > mentioned NSS (thanks)... while staying as catastrophically > inscrutable as wiring the red wire to ground; and that this works to > its advantage, making it difficult to remove by people who would > never, ever imagine that core software would abrogate established > contractual mechanisms without copious documentation... and that the > best we would do would be apologaeia from the likes of Fred Morris or > Nick Tait! > >> ... > > libc. Granted, your mileage may vary with your implementation, tire > inflation, RAM color and CPU orientation... but charm never matters. > > Rhetorically, how much does it take to get your stack explicitly > unloved? I don't know exactly, we don't have a lot of data points. > https://security.opensuse.org/2025/05/07/deepin-desktop-removal.html > > As far as I know, BIND has never chosen "DNS eins" as a molehill to > die on. Like I said, I wasn't trying to start a holy war, and I wasn't saying that systemd-resolved is good or bad. I just wanted to correct a few misconceptions, so that people are provided with accurate information and can make their own informed choices. :-) Nick. -- Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. bind-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users