On Fri, 6 Jun 2014 16:42:50 +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > >On Fri, 6 Jun 2014 02:11:47 -0700 (PDT) zespri wrote: > >> In short: when you get several options offered to you, and you have > >> no prior knowledge you've got to pick one randomly. That's what I > >> did. > > On 06.06.14 15:14, RW wrote: > >If you've already installed djbdns I'd leave it. I'm still using it > >and a lot of people only migrated away because they needed dnssec. > >If you are just running a soho server or desktop you aren't going to > >come under the kind of concerted poisoning attack that ISP caches > >would attract. > > > >It might not be under active development, but it was programmed > >very conservatively, and has a security history that's as impressive > >as bind's is dismal. Most of the criticism against djbdns are either > >myths or don't apply to the dnscache component. I'd be very > >surprised if you have a problem with it. > > I would not be surprised... I have already met people having problem > because of djbdns (and that's why I don't recommend using it)
What problem did they have specifically with dnscache?
