Martin McCormick: Re: PRE-ANNOUNCEMENT: BIND-Members Forum

[Paul A Vixie]

> 	I am also very concerned.  Does this mean no more open
> source for bind?

no.  this isn't about bind's distributability.  bind is open source
using a UCB-style license.  it can be incorporated into products, or
redistributed in binary or source formats, with or without fee, all
with no royalties to isc.  thus has it ever been and always shall be.

> Part of the attractiveness of open source software is the sunshine effect
> in that it is much more difficult to sneak something by the public if
> everybody and his/her dog can potentially read the code and speak up.

there is no plan to change the release schedule of BIND.  however, system
vendors need a running head start when pushing security patches out, since
they have sometimes got to burn 10,000 cdroms and put them into mailers.
so they need a little bit of advance warning.  similar reasoning for the root
name server and TLD operators.

> 	Our working group at Oklahoma State University sings the
> praises of bind and other ISC products because it is basically or
> was, basically built out in the open and relied on good design to
> survive.

none of that will change while i'm alive.

> 	Another thing that makes this software so attractive is
> that we don't have to say, "Mother, may I?" every time we do
> something.  We are or were not hampered by user licenses and all
> those other smelly artifacts which make more non-productive work
> for those of us in the trenches.

this isn't about bind.  it's about security and other notifications.

> 	Please tell us we have misunderstood and that this was
> all a mistake.

yes, you have misunderstood.