-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
I think most people here use BIND as their DNS server of choise.
I just happen to have updated DLZ patch for the current bind version.
DLZ patch allows you to use mysql (pgsql, ldap etc) as a backend for zone storage. I make no garantees, of course, but if anyone is interested on the patch (with or without the specfile for rpm building), please let me know.
To read more about DLZ: http://bind-dlz.sourceforge.net/
Best Regards,
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
Rodrigo Barbosa schrieb:
I think most people here use BIND as their DNS server of choise.
I just happen to have updated DLZ patch for the current bind version.
DLZ patch allows you to use mysql (pgsql, ldap etc) as a backend for zone storage. I make no garantees, of course, but if anyone is interested on the patch (with or without the specfile for rpm building), please let me know.
To read more about DLZ: http://bind-dlz.sourceforge.net/
Best Regards,
Hi Rodrigo,
mind you asking whether one should use your bind-dlz patch and not bind sdb? PNAELV includes SDB within the bind package on current Fedora Core and newer. Maybe you can point me to a paper?
Cheers
Alexander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 06:36:05PM +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Rodrigo Barbosa schrieb:
I think most people here use BIND as their DNS server of choise.
I just happen to have updated DLZ patch for the current bind version.
DLZ patch allows you to use mysql (pgsql, ldap etc) as a backend for zone storage. I make no garantees, of course, but if anyone is interested on the patch (with or without the specfile for rpm building), please let me know.
To read more about DLZ: http://bind-dlz.sourceforge.net/
Best Regards,
Hi Rodrigo,
mind you asking whether one should use your bind-dlz patch and not bind sdb? PNAELV includes SDB within the bind package on current Fedora Core and newer. Maybe you can point me to a paper?
I actually never heard of sdb. I'm not even able to find an specific URL for the project, even tho I've found some pages for specific drivers: http://www.venaas.no/ldap/bind-sdb/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/mysql-bind/
I'll go and take a look at it, so I can compare.
bind-dlz is far from complete. It only allow queries (no dynamic updating for you, unless you go directly to the database), the database is pretty confusing (but it can be easly improved), and you can't have bind configuration itself on the database.
Maybe sdb will be better. I'll have to check it out.
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 06:36:05PM +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Rodrigo Barbosa schrieb:
I think most people here use BIND as their DNS server of choise.
I just happen to have updated DLZ patch for the current bind version.
DLZ patch allows you to use mysql (pgsql, ldap etc) as a backend for zone storage. I make no garantees, of course, but if anyone is interested on the patch (with or without the specfile for rpm building), please let me know.
To read more about DLZ: http://bind-dlz.sourceforge.net/
Best Regards,
Hi Rodrigo,
mind you asking whether one should use your bind-dlz patch and not bind sdb? PNAELV includes SDB within the bind package on current Fedora Core and newer. Maybe you can point me to a paper?
I actually never heard of sdb. I'm not even able to find an specific URL for the project, even tho I've found some pages for specific drivers: http://www.venaas.no/ldap/bind-sdb/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/mysql-bind/
I'll go and take a look at it, so I can compare.
bind-dlz is far from complete. It only allow queries (no dynamic updating for you, unless you go directly to the database), the database is pretty confusing (but it can be easly improved), and you can't have bind configuration itself on the database.
Maybe sdb will be better. I'll have to check it out.
It would seem that the SAMBA 4.0 project that is adding Active Directory, will have quite a bit of tying DNS and SQL.
Been a while since I looked in that direction. I only want a SAMBA NT domain controller.....
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 12:56:08PM -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
Maybe sdb will be better. I'll have to check it out.
It would seem that the SAMBA 4.0 project that is adding Active Directory, will have quite a bit of tying DNS and SQL.
Been a while since I looked in that direction. I only want a SAMBA NT domain controller.....
I'm trying to create a 100% MySQL based web hosting solution, what is why I'm so interested on a mysql backend for bind.
The mysqlfs project is promissing, but I think it will at at least 1 year before it even gets to beta. I want it so I can store homepages.
Exim and Courier-imap have me covered on the e-mail front.
[]s
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 01:52:19PM -0300, Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
Maybe sdb will be better. I'll have to check it out.
Okey, I just did a quick test of mysql-bind (sdb). Overall, it is much better than DLZ, specially when you are used the managing zone files manually.
It is still not everything I was looking for, since it lacks a backend for configuration (named.conf), but seems to be much easier to create a web frontend.
Also, configuring a zone (on named.conf) for mysql-bind is MUCH simpler than with DLZ, and it seems to support dynamic zone updating (but I haven't tested yet).
Will just have to test it a little further and see how it turns out.
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 06:36:05PM +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Rodrigo Barbosa schrieb:
I think most people here use BIND as their DNS server of choise.
I just happen to have updated DLZ patch for the current bind version.
DLZ patch allows you to use mysql (pgsql, ldap etc) as a backend for zone storage. I make no garantees, of course, but if anyone is interested on the patch (with or without the specfile for rpm building), please let me know.
To read more about DLZ: http://bind-dlz.sourceforge.net/
Best Regards,
Hi Rodrigo,
mind you asking whether one should use your bind-dlz patch and not bind sdb? PNAELV includes SDB within the bind package on current Fedora Core and newer. Maybe you can point me to a paper?
I actually never heard of sdb. I'm not even able to find an specific URL for the project, even tho I've found some pages for specific drivers: http://www.venaas.no/ldap/bind-sdb/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/mysql-bind/
I'll go and take a look at it, so I can compare.
bind-dlz is far from complete. It only allow queries (no dynamic updating for you, unless you go directly to the database), the database is pretty confusing (but it can be easly improved), and you can't have bind configuration itself on the database.
Maybe sdb will be better. I'll have to check it out.
Hi -
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
I recently converted ~120k domains in DNS from BIND to MyDNS, and it's proving to work quite well. I'm extremely happy with it. Even moreso, implementing a secondary is as easy as MySQL replication. It's fast, has proven to be stable, and since it's MySQL-based, we are easily able to integrate it with our other systems.
More information can be found at http://mydns.bboy.net .
Hope that helps -dant
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 11:23:55AM -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
Hi -
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
I recently converted ~120k domains in DNS from BIND to MyDNS, and it's proving to work quite well. I'm extremely happy with it. Even moreso, implementing a secondary is as easy as MySQL replication. It's fast, has proven to be stable, and since it's MySQL-based, we are easily able to integrate it with our other systems.
More information can be found at http://mydns.bboy.net .
Well, having no recursive services is a bitch, at least for me. MyDNS's IPv6 support is also, from what I've heard, between non-existant and iffy.
I have read about PowerDNS, but I really haven't tried it yet. It is hard to step away from Bind.
[]s
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 11:23:55AM -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
Hi -
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
I recently converted ~120k domains in DNS from BIND to MyDNS, and it's proving to work quite well. I'm extremely happy with it. Even moreso, implementing a secondary is as easy as MySQL replication. It's fast, has proven to be stable, and since it's MySQL-based, we are easily able to integrate it with our other systems.
More information can be found at http://mydns.bboy.net .
Well, having no recursive services is a bitch, at least for me. MyDNS's IPv6 support is also, from what I've heard, between non-existant and iffy.
I have read about PowerDNS, but I really haven't tried it yet. It is hard to step away from Bind.
[]s
<snip snip snip yada yada blah blah>
Hi -
Yes, I cheat - I run BIND as a small caching nameserver accepting connections on 127.0.0.1, which MyDNS asks for. I forgot to mention that MyDNS doesn't offer recursive services. Oops.
Thanks -dant
On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 11:23 -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
I recently converted ~120k domains in DNS from BIND to MyDNS, and it's proving to work quite well. I'm extremely happy with it. Even moreso, implementing a secondary is as easy as MySQL replication. It's fast, has proven to be stable, and since it's MySQL-based, we are easily able to integrate it with our other systems.
You forget to mention what problem you were having with BIND that this solves.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 11:23 -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
I recently converted ~120k domains in DNS from BIND to MyDNS, and it's proving to work quite well. I'm extremely happy with it. Even moreso, implementing a secondary is as easy as MySQL replication. It's fast, has proven to be stable, and since it's MySQL-based, we are easily able to integrate it with our other systems.
You forget to mention what problem you were having with BIND that this solves.
Hi -
For one, BIND was taking quite a while to reload. Secondly, like I said, it allowed for easier integration with our Hosting system, which is almost completely automated - which is what I think the original poster was wanting to accomplish.
Thanks -dant
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 01:01:41PM -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
I recently converted ~120k domains in DNS from BIND to MyDNS, and it's proving to work quite well. I'm extremely happy with it. Even moreso, implementing a secondary is as easy as MySQL replication. It's fast, has proven to be stable, and since it's MySQL-based, we are easily able to integrate it with our other systems.
You forget to mention what problem you were having with BIND that this solves.
For one, BIND was taking quite a while to reload. Secondly, like I said, it allowed for easier integration with our Hosting system, which is almost completely automated - which is what I think the original poster was wanting to accomplish.
What hosting system are you using ? I've taken a look at several (cPanel, Plesk etc), and found them all to be way too intrusive (not to mention crappy).
[]s
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 01:01:41PM -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
I recently converted ~120k domains in DNS from BIND to MyDNS, and it's proving to work quite well. I'm extremely happy with it. Even moreso, implementing a secondary is as easy as MySQL replication. It's fast, has proven to be stable, and since it's MySQL-based, we are easily able to integrate it with our other systems.
You forget to mention what problem you were having with BIND that this solves.
For one, BIND was taking quite a while to reload. Secondly, like I said, it allowed for easier integration with our Hosting system, which is almost completely automated - which is what I think the original poster was wanting to accomplish.
What hosting system are you using ? I've taken a look at several (cPanel, Plesk etc), and found them all to be way too intrusive (not to mention crappy).
[]s
Hi -
We made our own. I think we can both agree that none of them are really suited for small, specific types of hosting.
Thanks -dant
Dan Trainor spake the following on 7/28/2006 3:30 PM:
Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 01:01:41PM -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
I recently converted ~120k domains in DNS from BIND to MyDNS, and it's proving to work quite well. I'm extremely happy with it. Even moreso, implementing a secondary is as easy as MySQL replication. It's fast, has proven to be stable, and since it's MySQL-based, we are easily able to integrate it with our other systems.
You forget to mention what problem you were having with BIND that this solves.
For one, BIND was taking quite a while to reload. Secondly, like I said, it allowed for easier integration with our Hosting system, which is almost completely automated - which is what I think the original poster was wanting to accomplish.
What hosting system are you using ? I've taken a look at several (cPanel, Plesk etc), and found them all to be way too intrusive (not to mention crappy).
[]s
Hi -
We made our own. I think we can both agree that none of them are really suited for small, specific types of hosting.
Thanks -dant
Have you ever thought of open-sourcing yours?
Scott Silva wrote:
Dan Trainor spake the following on 7/28/2006 3:30 PM:
Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 01:01:41PM -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I thought I'd throw it out there.
I recently converted ~120k domains in DNS from BIND to MyDNS, and it's proving to work quite well. I'm extremely happy with it. Even moreso, implementing a secondary is as easy as MySQL replication. It's fast, has proven to be stable, and since it's MySQL-based, we are easily able to integrate it with our other systems.
You forget to mention what problem you were having with BIND that this solves.
For one, BIND was taking quite a while to reload. Secondly, like I said, it allowed for easier integration with our Hosting system, which is almost completely automated - which is what I think the original poster was wanting to accomplish.
What hosting system are you using ? I've taken a look at several (cPanel, Plesk etc), and found them all to be way too intrusive (not to mention crappy).
[]s
Hi -
We made our own. I think we can both agree that none of them are really suited for small, specific types of hosting.
Thanks -dant
Have you ever thought of open-sourcing yours?
Hi -
I think that would be great, but unfortunately this is not an option.
The reason for this is that it is highly catered to a specific industry... it wouldn't work for just any old hosting. It's complicated, sorry heh.
Thanks -dant
Feizhou spake the following on 8/1/2006 2:40 AM:
Have you ever thought of open-sourcing yours?
There is an open source dns + sql package that is based on djb's tinydns and on postgresql if you are interested.
I'm not currently hosting, but I like to contribute where I can. It's just part of what makes open source what it is!
Scott Silva wrote:
Feizhou spake the following on 8/1/2006 2:40 AM:
Have you ever thought of open-sourcing yours?
There is an open source dns + sql package that is based on djb's tinydns and on postgresql if you are interested.
I'm not currently hosting, but I like to contribute where I can. It's just part of what makes open source what it is!
Hi -
And I completely agree, unless that puts trade secrets and daily operations at risk. But that's another subject entirely.
Like I said, I'd love to, but I cannot :)
Thanks -dant
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 11:01:54AM -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
Have you ever thought of open-sourcing yours?
There is an open source dns + sql package that is based on djb's tinydns and on postgresql if you are interested.
I'm not currently hosting, but I like to contribute where I can. It's just part of what makes open source what it is!
Hi -
And I completely agree, unless that puts trade secrets and daily operations at risk. But that's another subject entirely.
Like I said, I'd love to, but I cannot :)
I have to disagree with both points, specially with the second. If sharing the code put your daily operations at risk, to me that means "security through obscurity". Ergo, full of bugs.
About trade secrets. Well, I don't know exactly what functionalities you have there, but I have seem very few cases where a control panel will qualify as having positive trade secrets.
By positive I mean the kind of trade secret other companies can't use to put you to ground. Then again, you might as well be in one of those few cases. I really can't judge on this one.
Hey MOM! Look ! I'm the Off-Topic KING!!! :)
- -- Rodrigo Barbosa "Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur" "Be excellent to each other ..." - Bill & Ted (Wyld Stallyns)
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 15:35 -0300, Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 11:01:54AM -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
Have you ever thought of open-sourcing yours?
<snip>
And I completely agree, unless that puts trade secrets and daily operations at risk. But that's another subject entirely.
Like I said, I'd love to, but I cannot :)
I have to disagree with both points, specially with the second. If sharing the code put your daily operations at risk, to me that means "security through obscurity". Ergo, full of bugs.
s/Ergo/Maybe/ # Let's not propagate mindless drivel that supports justification of one process by invalid and unproven assumptions about another. I don't by "Ergo" for the same reason I don't buy "We can't withdraw now or all those kids died for no reason!". Fallacious assertion based on invalid or unproven assumptions.
<snip>
Rodrigo Barbosa
<snip sig stuff>
I believe I could easily be *more* off-topic if led down that path.
William L. Maltby wrote:
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 15:35 -0300, Rodrigo Barbosa wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 11:01:54AM -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
Have you ever thought of open-sourcing yours?
<snip>
And I completely agree, unless that puts trade secrets and daily operations at risk. But that's another subject entirely.
Like I said, I'd love to, but I cannot :)
I have to disagree with both points, specially with the second. If sharing the code put your daily operations at risk, to me that means "security through obscurity". Ergo, full of bugs.
s/Ergo/Maybe/ # Let's not propagate mindless drivel that supports justification of one process by invalid and unproven assumptions about another. I don't by "Ergo" for the same reason I don't buy "We can't withdraw now or all those kids died for no reason!". Fallacious assertion based on invalid or unproven assumptions.
<snip>
Rodrigo Barbosa
<snip sig stuff>
I believe I could easily be *more* off-topic if led down that path.
Hi -
Alright, I think we've killed this topic. Thanks for disagreeing with me. I didn't mean to raise a storm, sorry if your points disagree with mine.
IF you have any further questions re: the actual topic, I'd be happy to participate. If not, well, I guess that's the end of it. I'm not going to discuss anything aside from that, thanks.
Thanks -dant
Dan Trainor spake the following on 8/1/2006 11:01 AM:
Scott Silva wrote:
Feizhou spake the following on 8/1/2006 2:40 AM:
Have you ever thought of open-sourcing yours?
There is an open source dns + sql package that is based on djb's tinydns and on postgresql if you are interested.
I'm not currently hosting, but I like to contribute where I can. It's just part of what makes open source what it is!
Hi -
And I completely agree, unless that puts trade secrets and daily operations at risk. But that's another subject entirely.
Like I said, I'd love to, but I cannot :)
Thanks -dant
I totally agree with you. My job would be history if I posted any kind of trade secrets. And my chances of re-employment in the industry would also be very low.
Bbt Lists wrote:
Feizhou wrote:
There is an open source dns + sql package that is based on djb's tinydns and on postgresql if you are interested. _______________________________________________
What is it called?
-
Alexander Dalloz -
Bbt Lists -
Dan Trainor -
Feizhou -
Les Mikesell -
Robert Moskowitz -
Rodrigo Barbosa -
Scott Silva -
William L. Maltby