I'm not so worried about Linux DNS servers: there are plenty of alternatives to BIND if I want something a little simpler to configure or a different feature set.
I'd just like to see a FOSS DHCP server that's scalable and that's different than ISC dhcpd. The config management piece doesn't worry me so much--if I'm rolling out your changes straight to production systems, that should probably be addressed before anything else. John On 08/29/2013 07:50 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (bblisa4) wrote: >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of John Miller >> >> Apart from Microsoft DHCP and ISC DHCPD, are you aware of other DHCP >> servers out there? We'll be considering a revamp later this fall, and aren't > > Do you want to name any specific things you care about? > > Cuz I'll be honest with you - I've used a whole bunch of dhcp and dns > servers, and I usually wish I could get MS when I don't have it. They make > it so braindead simple to keep the service always running reliably and fully > integrated dynamic dns updates, and automatically synced with a redundant > server. > > By comparison - on solaris or various flavors of linux - even on osx server - > configuring the redundancy is a PITA, and in your daily operations, f you > make a mistake in the config, you restart or reload the service, and voila. > Service is down. Everyone loses. > > At a major company who shall remain unnamed, they ran redhat with the default > named package, and some genius decided to use an archaic version control > system on the named config files, with a wrapper script to push out changes > to the dns servers. One mistake in the config file, and suddenly all the dns > servers are down. NFS mounts failing, cluster frack. > > Yes. I beg for MS by comparison to everything else I've seen. > _______________________________________________ bblisa mailing list [email protected] http://www.bblisa.org/mailman/listinfo/bblisa
