|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: [NANOG] Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded
At 3:54 AM +0100 2/2/01, Pim van Riezen wrote: >I also seriously counter your claim that having this bracket on the next >line is in any way bogus. It's visually superior to the now enforced >option of having it on the same line. There is nothing in the parser not >to understand it. Spreading data across lines is commonly accepted in a >lot of configuration languages and bind has been among this in all >versions I previously ran. Why is that now suddenly bogus? According to RFC1035, it's ALWAYS been bogus. It's just been a bug that BIND's parser that accepted the bogus data. It's funny that when I reported this as a bug when bind9 testing was going on, ISC was like "it accepts paren on the next line?" ... since bind9 was written from scratch, it didn't inherit the legacy bogosity of accepting \n(, and crapped out, just as 8.2.3 did. It appears that my (and others, I'm sure) bug report on 9.0.0beta-whatever caused the re-evaluation of the 8.2.x codebase to fix that bug in 8.x. So I guess I'll apologize for opening my trap. ;-) D -- +---------------------+-----------------------------------------+ | [email protected] | "Conan! What is best in life?" | | Derek J. Balling | "To crush your enemies, see them | | | driven before you, and to hear the | | | lamentation of their women!" | +---------------------+-----------------------------------------+
|