djbdns support

[fhneric]

I think that it would be better to use djbdns over bind because its faster, and would allow for easier ipv6 integration. All the information is nicely documented at http://cr.yp.to/djbdns.html

Please consider adding support for djbdns.

 

[scsi]

It will never switch to anything but bind.

 

[nobaloney]

http://serverfault.com/questions/32683/djbdns-vs-bind#32698

The biggest problem with djbdns is best put the way my first grade teacher put it on my report card: "doesn't play well with others". It simply doesn't behave like anything else on a unix box in all sorts of very small ways that can bite you later. It uses a syntax for zone files you won't see anywhere else.

It would be very hard to implement because it uses a non-standard method for saving zone information, and that's tied into how DirectAdmin identifies domains on the server.

It would overly cmplicate backup/restore as DNS would have to be converted from source to destination zone file depiction when using backups for migration.

It would make it impossible to use standard Slave DNS solutions.

Jeff

 

[zEitEr]

Please consider adding support for djbdns.

Hello,

I could probably offer a commerce service for writing a plugin for you. If you still need it, please contact me by PM so we could discuss details.

 

[nobaloney]

Does djbdns use zone files? DirectAdmin requires them, as it uses them for other purposes besides DNS.

Jeff

 

[zEitEr]

Why do you ask? I'm not going either to remove or modify them. There is no need to do that, since we could use API and POST/PRE scripts.

 

[nobaloney]

Curious, actually. Years ago when I looked at djbdns it was very controversial; considered to not play well with others (for example, no support for slave DNS, which is an important part of the world's DNS structure, though not part of Dan Bernstein's view of DNS.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not against Dan Bernstein's products at all; I think Maildir, for example, is much improved over mbox (though perhaps a bit more complex than it needs to be). But for example, if DirectAdmin had started with djbdns instead of with BIND, it would have been impossible to easily do master2slave DNS Replicator.

Keeping two copies of DNS, the master files used by DirectAdmin (BIND-compat8ible zone files) is after all, at best a waste of space, and as an old school database designer who used to care a lot of database optimization, that sort of still bothers me on some level. In fact just this past weekend I touched on the subject of data normalization with Mark (the M of JBMC).

But djbdns zone files are very efficient, and wouldn't take up much space at all.

I couldn't have used djbdns in my infrastructure until recently because we offered Slave DNS services. But we're moving away from that now, and in fact I could even consider using djbdns for it's efficiency (if it protects against duplicates as Master2Slave does, and as according to a recent thread in these forums, DirectSlave fails to do).

Jeff