Re: [MaraDNS list] How to get MaraDNS and Deadwood to talk to each other?

On 03/05/2012 03:46, Sam Trenholme wrote:

> I don't know if your engaged or married, Joshua, so please don't take
> this the wrong way: I discovered that marriage changed my fundamental
> life priorities.  I realized I no longer had time to perform
> professional quality software development "for fun and for free" any
> more.


I understand enough, especially on the "for free" bit.  Software development
is, by no means, a trivial task and many hours are often put into it, so
there is nothing wrong with attempting to seek some form of compensation or
ceasing work due to lack of available funds.  But on the "for fun" part,
that is one of the most important aspects.  Software development always has
to have some kind of "fun" in it in order for it to be enjoyable.  Once you
hit that wall where a particular project is no longer fun, then it is quite
understandable that it is time to move on to new challenges.  Because
recapturing that lost fun is often an enigmatic challenge itself and few
ever accomplish it.


> So, I made a promise to declare Deadwood and MaraDNS finished once
> full recursion was implemented, and canceled plans to merge Deadwood
> with MaraDNS.  I finished Deadwood in September of 2010 and have been
> only maintaining Deadwood and MaraDNS since then. [1]


A congratulations is in order here!  It is rare for anyone to ever announce
that a software project, even just a specific version of it, is "finished".
 Often, the goal is to just start on the next version and figure out what
the next gizmotronic gonkulator to add is.


> I think these things are worthwhile to do.  I think one advantage
> MaraDNS and Deadwood have is security, yes, and Deadwood has the best
> security a recursive DNS server can have short of implementing DNSSEC
> [2] [3].  I think another advantage is that Deadwood is tiny and
> MaraDNS really small; this works really great in MIPS routers and
> other embedded environments.


I agree on the routers bit.  I might have to look into getting Deadwood to
build on the OpenWRT toolchain (or see if they haven't already included it)
and try to get it running on my router, and keep the authoritative component
to just my internal system.  My primary work in the MIPS world has been more
focused on the older, larger SGI workstations, though that has fallen behind
a bit as I get tied up with Life and all the little details it includes.

In this vein, the docs I followed to get a test setup running had me use
Deadwood's "upstream_servers" to point to a MaraDNS instance as
authoritative for my local network root (though Deadwod strips the AA bit).
 Is the reverse possible?  I.e., have MaraDNS configured to answer all local
queries, but anything it doesn't recognize, to ask to a Deadwood instance?
I didn't see such an example in the example configs (though I might have
missed it).  I'll poke through the full example config later to check.


> Since I am no longer in a position to implement significant new
> features for MaraDNS and Deadwood, I would love to hand things over to
> a maintainer.  I am not going to hand over the reins lightly; anyone
> who becomes MaraDNS' maintainer would have to demonstrate a long-term
> interest in MaraDNS' code base that lasts at least a year.  Also, I
> ask that they increase the major version number of MaraDNS and
> Deadwood (MaraDNS 3 and Deadwood 4, or more simply MaraDNS/Deadwood 4)
> and I will continue to fix security problems found in MaraDNS 1, as
> well as performing basic bug fixes for MaraDNS 2, Deadwood 2, and
> Deadwood 3.


Perhaps you should look at how the Linux kernel management works these days.
 Torvalds has largely stated that he doesn't really write any new code for
the kernel, but spends most of his time commenting on submitted code and
reviewing patches and handling the releases of the primary branch.  Other
individuals take up the roles of being subsystem maintainers and releasing
new versions in other branches (such as -stable).

While you probably don't even have time enough for that, creating some sort
of "lead maintainer" positions, one for MaraDNS and another for Deadwood,
might be worth looking into.  They would handle the existing codebases,
process new patches and prepare new versions for release.  You could
maintain final review before new releases (or even on new patches), so as to
safeguard MaraDNS/Deadwood's history of being small and secure.

Not that I've done a qualitative, objective analysis on that approach, but
it might require less time investment than writing all new code and managing
releases yourself, while still allowing you enough ample time to stay in
touch with the project.

Food for thought, perhaps.


Cheers!

-- 
Joshua Kinard
Gentoo/MIPS
[email protected]
4096R/D25D95E3 2011-03-28

"The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us.  And
our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between."

--Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic