On Sat, 5 Jun 2021, Reindl Harald wrote:
besides that - i didn't hear a serious reasoning for a native named
binary on windows these days and given there are tons of ways running a
linux binary compared to 20 years ago i call it a waste of time
* more complex code implies more errors
some errors being security-related, which in the case of BIND servers
used by MANY users is a very bad situation.
Furthermore, are there even any 'important' Windows primary servers, that
serve the open internet or many users (authoritative or resolving) - but
rather only serve closed/internal private or commercial interests?
If some entity is already wasting money on MS software and licenses and
BIND is important to them, then they should also support development and
pay for support just like they pay MS.
I do believe ISC should be more clear about the intended platforms for
BIND. It's not a crime to not support one corporation's specific
and different platform.
Brett
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions.
Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information.
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
