North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: djbdns: An alternative to BIND
[email protected] wrote: >> however, since BIND9 is compatible with BIND8 and BIND4, and with >> microsoft's DNS, and with virtually every other DNS in the world >> except for "tinydns", > > Err, "compatible" because it detects them and then does the > right thing, and uses the traditional protocol. You know...I'm reminded of something we're all familiar with that came up, oh...lets say 8 years ago. There were some new-fangled devices out there that were capable of communicating over POTS at somewhere close to 56 kbps. It seems to me there were two flavors of them, K-Flex and X2. You might have heard of them. Anyway, if your modem had K-Flex firmware and was trying to connect to something using X2, you couldn't connect anywhere near 56 kbps. And vice-versa. The two technologies were incompatible. And yet, once they detected the incompatability, they were able to renegotiate down to a protocol they had in common, say v.32. Now eventually we came out with the v.90 standard so that everyone could play together nicely. Point is, even before there *was* a 56k standard, all those "incompatible" modems could still communicate, just not using their new proprietary protocols. So, I guess I'm wondering....how is what BIND9 does substantially different than the case I've outlined above? Andrew
|