I have spent a lot of time on FreeBSD.org web pages, but I still can not
find
VERY SIMPLE answer for this question:
what version of FreeBSD should I use ?
I need system which is VERY STABLE, with as few possibilities to hack as
possible
(the best is absolutely closed :-) ), running only
, 2003 6:34 PM
Subject: Re: What version of BSD should I use
I have spent a lot of time on FreeBSD.org web pages, but I still can not
find
VERY SIMPLE answer for this question:
what version of FreeBSD should I use ?
I need system which is VERY STABLE, with as few possibilities to hack
Thanks for quick response.
I have thought so, but I want to be sure. There is also 4.7. Do you think
better to use 4.8 ?
It's best to use the latest 4.x
Ken
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
FreeBSD 4.8 is very stable. 5.x has some problems. (its new)
Sendmail works fine in FreeBSD 4.8. Named is considered insecure
because people use it. If you pick another product to be safe, make
sure no one uses it. Any suggestion on this list would be to popular
to be safe. As I said in
Sendmail works fine in FreeBSD 4.8. Named is considered insecure
because people use it. If you pick another product to be safe, make
sure no one uses it. Any suggestion on this list would be to popular
to be safe. As I said in my last email, people find holes in popular
software more
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Peter Rosa
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 9:30 AM
To: freebsd-questions
Subject: What version of BSD should I use
Importance: High
Hello everybody,
I have spent a lot of time on FreeBSD.org web
Well, but what about djbdns ?
Is it fully compatible with BIND ?
I think it is, as you use it :-)
I have never heard about it.
And what should I do with my new book
(900 pages about configuring this mega program) ?
Peter Rosa
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 2003-07-25T17:06:50Z, Peter Rosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, but what about djbdns ?
Decent program, but the license is awful.
Is it fully compatible with BIND ?
No, it is not. The configuration is not even remotely close, and the author
refuses to support parts of the RFC that he
At 2003-07-25T16:54:22Z, Kenneth Culver [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's a big program with lots of past exploits, and new ones being
discovered very often.
No comment about old versions. Do you think that BIND 9 is as bad?
--
Kirk Strauser
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:06:50 +0200
Peter Rosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, but what about djbdns ?
Is it fully compatible with BIND ?
I think it is, as you use it :-)
I have never heard about it.
no, try powerdns instead :)
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, but what about djbdns ?
Is it fully compatible with BIND ?
I think it is, as you use it :-)
I have never heard about it.
It's complient with whatever standards there are governing DNS. And it
works very well for me.
Ken
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, but what about djbdns ?
Decent program, but the license is awful.
yeah, the licence is wierd.
Is it fully compatible with BIND ?
No, it is not. The configuration is not even remotely close, and the author
refuses to support parts of the RFC that he feels to be problematic.
It
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:06:50 +0200, Peter Rosa wrote:
Well, but what about djbdns ?
Is it fully compatible with BIND ?
I think it is, as you use it :-)
I have never heard about it.
djbdns does two things which may be of interest to you:
1) It is a secure, rock-solid alternative to BIND,
Well, but what about djbdns ?
Is it fully compatible with BIND ?
I think it is, as you use it :-)
I have never heard about it.
no, try powerdns instead :)
Depends on what he means by compatible. I took this to mean will it
communicate with bind servers and the answer is yes it can be
When I posted earlier, I was referring to bind 9. It is a complete
rewrite..
bind 4 was terrible.
As for sendmail, from my understanding the biggest problem in the past
was that the entire thing ran as root. Didn't they setup the delivery
agent in 8.12 to run as a different user with lower
And what should I do with my new book
(900 pages about configuring this mega program) ?
900 pages about configuring which mega program?
Of course, it is about sendmail.
Peter Rosa
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
lol.
Sendmail configuration is terrible.
Some days i dream of a mail server that integrates smtp, pop and imap
into one server that is easy to configure with built in spam filtering.
(oh and it has to work). Then I realize I'm stuck with 6 different
programs to handle essentially 1 service
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:54:15 +0200, Peter Rosa wrote:
And what should I do with my new book
(900 pages about configuring this mega program) ?
900 pages about configuring which mega program?
Of course, it is about sendmail.
To my knowledge, the only reason for using sendmail is that so
[David Benfell wrote ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on 7/25/03 12:44 PM]
It does other things as well. A starting place for more information
would be http://www.djbdns.org/
actually that's now http://www.tinydns.org/ now.
--
george donnelly ~ http://www.zettai.net/ ~ Quality Zope Hosting
Shared and
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 14:00:47 -0500, george donnelly wrote:
[David Benfell wrote ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on 7/25/03 12:44 PM]
It does other things as well. A starting place for more information
would be http://www.djbdns.org/
actually that's now http://www.tinydns.org/ now.
My bad.
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 14:03:05 -0400
Lucas Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
lol.
Sendmail configuration is terrible.
Some days i dream of a mail server that integrates smtp, pop and imap
into one server that is easy to configure with built in spam filtering.
(oh and it has to work).
21 matches
Mail list logo
