On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 06:34:59AM -0400, Skip Ford wrote: > Doug Barton wrote: > > In an effort to find some kind of balance (I won't even try to say > > "consensus") between those who hate the idea of slaving the root > > zones, those who like the idea but don't want it to be the default, > > and those who like the idea, I've made the following change: > > > > 1. Change the default behavior back to using a hint zone for the root. > > 2. Leave the root slave zone config as a commented out example. > > 3. Remove the B and F root servers from the example at the request of > > their operators. > > > > I hope that we can now dial down the volume on the meta-issue of how > > the change was done, and focus on the operational issues of whether > > it's a good idea or not. > > Thanks. I'm afraid the consensus has to come from the operators, > not from FreeBSD folks. > > If the operators were required to support it, I think everyone > should slave the roots, not just those running busy servers. Just > like I'd think everyone should sync with stratum-1 servers if > those operators supported everyone doing that.
pool.root-servers.net sounds like a good idea :-) Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.mavetju.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Weblog: http://www.mavetju.org/weblog/ _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"