[CentOS] Blasphemous? any support for a REPO of current edition BIND, et al (e.g., BZ561299)?

[Kwan Lowe]

On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Larry Vaden <vaden at texoma.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote:
>>
>> you mean like the bind97 available in c5-testing right now, that should
>> be in 5.6 soon ?
>
> Karanbir,
>
> WIth a lot of due respect, no, not exactly, since 9.7.0-P2 (if I'm
> reading it correctly) was released almost a year ago by isc.org.
>
> I was thinking more along the lines of /isc/bind9/9.7.2-P3/, released
> 2 months ago.
>
> Is there that much distrust of the current output of leading authors
> that we need to "wait a long while"?
>
> kind regards/ldv

I appreciate the long roadmap and release schedule.

At my work we need to do two to three year forecasts. Budgets may
allow infrastructure updates every three or four years. If upgrading
to a newer package means breaking backwards compatibility (i.e., it's
an upgrade versus an update), we cannot associate the work and
resources to a maintenance budget and may need to find other sources
of funding.

That's the business case...

On the technical side, for every application we deploy we need to go
through an entire certification process. So updating bind does not
mean that we run a few dig queries against the new server, but doing a
complete regression test against all applications that rely on bind.
This would include revenue generating websites, authentication
mechanisms, SSL, NFS mappings, and other apps that require name
resolution (and it's surprising how many apps need more than just
name/ip).

A few months ago there was an Active Directory update. It had
repercussions for a CIFS service running on a human resources server.
This affected payroll processing. Now we need to find resources to
upgrade that application and we cannot use the same budget.