On Sat, 20 Jan 2001, Bruce Dawson wrote:
> One of the great mysteries of the DNS world is: Why do they still refer
> to 'bind' as 'named' - or vice versa?
FWIW, I've heard the (possibly bogus) explanation that "BIND" is the whole
package, including other utilities, while "named" is the specific program that
answers DNS queries on port 53.
Personally, I'm with you. I actually think both names are bad. The word
"bind" is used for so many other things (as Thomas's message shows), and the
name "BIND" is obsolete (modern BIND has about as much to do with Berkeley as
Linux's "sunrpc" implementation has to do with Sun). Meanwhile, "named" is
non-obvious, overly general, and leads to pronunciation confusion.
"domaind" and/or "iscdns" would seem to make a lot more sense to me.
On the gripping hand, I think we've got about as much a chance of changing
the name of ISC's BIND program as Richard Stallman has of changing the name of
Linux. :-)
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Net Technologies, Inc. <http://www.ntisys.com>
Voice: (800)905-3049 x18 Fax: (978)499-7839
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
