Fwd: Re: Odd problems trying to make use of libbind as a replacement resolver...

[Kevin Darcy]

Brad Knowles wrote:

>Folks,
>
>	Sorry, I wanted to make a correction to my previous statement:
>
>  
>
>>	BIND-4 was the second to worst "spaghetti code" mess that this industry
>> has ever seen, and BIND 8 was probably the worst.
>>    
>>
>
>	Turn that around.  BIND-8 was the second-worst "spaghetti code" 
>mess, while BIND-4 was the worst.  The development team that Paul 
>Vixie drew together around him did the best they could to clean up 
>the BIND-4 code, but there was only so much they could do.  Which is 
>part of why BIND-9 was done as a complete ground-up re-write.
>
>	There is a page at the ISC website entitled "A Brief History of 
>BIND" at <http://www.isc.org/index.pl?/sw/bind/bind-history.php>, and 
>there is also some information at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BIND> 
>and <http://www.serverwatch.com/tutorials/article.php/3497601#hist>, 
>among others.
>
I'm not so sure I agree with that. Both BIND 4 and BIND 8 were pretty 
bad structurally, but BIND 8 added a whole raft of new features which 
made the spaghetti even thicker and goopier. I think this outweighed 
whatever heroic cleanup efforts they attempted...

- Kevin