On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Greg Zartman wrote:
> Maybe I'm not seeing the entire picture here, but seems that one would > need to insure that the correct version of BIND was installed and that > both it and DHCP were reconfigured to take advantage of DDNS (not an > simply task). Not a simple task. But I think that it is what Filippo's intention is. Way back when Filippo first raised the subject, he did mention an alternative interface script, which interacted with tinydns rather than Bind. At the time I warned him that we were leaning towards using tinydns (from the djbdns package), so work which depended on bind9 might become orphaned. This is a repeat of that warning. [Note, OTOH, that we haven't yet committed to any changes in the DNS system.] -- Charlie Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lead Product Developer Network Server Solutions Group http://www.e-smith.com/ Mitel Networks Corporation http://www.mitel.com/ Phone: +1 (613) 368 4376 or 564 8000 Fax: +1 (613) 564 7739 -- Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives by mail and http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
