Holyland Conference

[jerusalem conference]

This Announcement is intended for Physicians, Nurses and Therapists . 



An International Conference on Integrative Medicine will be held in October 

2010 in Jerusalem . 



The Conference will deal with ways to unite the scientific principles of modern 

medicine with the holistic principles of alternative medicine, 



hosting a dialogue between professionals and participants from around the world.



In order to give all those interested the possibility to participate we hereby 

announce that the registration has started. 



Details and registration forms are available in the Conference site : 
www.jerconvention.comB  





Always at your service,

Avraham Fried

Director

The Jerusalem International Conference on Integrative Medicine 



If you don't belong to the medical field, please excuse us and Unsubscribe 

to remove your address.

Re: DNSSEC and OpenBSD default BIND

[Stuart Henderson]

On 2010/08/16 08:46, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> cvsps is absolutely invaluable for this sort of stuff.

it is, but our changes to BIND are in areas which have seen quite
a few changes upstream.

> 
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 08:12:53AM +0200, Denis Fondras wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Following my previous message from July, 18th, I am back to BIND as
> > my tests with nsd/unbound are not really conclusive (can't make both
> > work with only one IP and they don't support views).

single IP -> you could bind nsd to 127.0.0.1, and let unbound bind
to other addresses on the system. have unbound forward-zone the
relevant zones to the local nsd. or for simple setups, "local-zone"
and "local-data" might be enough.

as always with this configuration, you can end up serving bad
data to resolver clients if a domain moves away before you change
config.

views -> it's a hack, but you can run multiple copies on alternative
ports and use PF to redirect users to the correct instance based on
source address.

> > So I rolled up my sleeves and started to port OpenBSD changes to
> > BIND-9.7.1-P2. Changing str-functions to strl-functions was the easy
> > part :)
> > Unfortunately, I have a hard time with privileges separation and
> > port randomization. In fact I don't know where to place them.
> > I made a diff between OpenBSD version and BIND-9.4.2-P2 and tried to
> > port it to BIND-9.7.1-P2 but it seems there was a huge change in
> > socket and pidfile handling.
> > 
> > Is anyone willing to help understanding these changes ?

unless you really understand the areas that have been modified
in OpenBSD I feel you would be better served by making a straight
port of a more recent bind 9. without full understanding, changes
in this area are more likely to weaken than strengthen things...

Re: DNSSEC and OpenBSD default BIND

[Nicholas Marriott]

cvsps is absolutely invaluable for this sort of stuff.


On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 08:12:53AM +0200, Denis Fondras wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Following my previous message from July, 18th, I am back to BIND as
> my tests with nsd/unbound are not really conclusive (can't make both
> work with only one IP and they don't support views).
> 
> So I rolled up my sleeves and started to port OpenBSD changes to
> BIND-9.7.1-P2. Changing str-functions to strl-functions was the easy
> part :)
> Unfortunately, I have a hard time with privileges separation and
> port randomization. In fact I don't know where to place them.
> I made a diff between OpenBSD version and BIND-9.4.2-P2 and tried to
> port it to BIND-9.7.1-P2 but it seems there was a huge change in
> socket and pidfile handling.
> 
> Is anyone willing to help understanding these changes ?
> 
> Thank you in advance,
> Denis