Multiple masters expected behavior?

[Kevin Oberman]

It makes it really hard to follow the thread.
> Why not?
> > Please don't top post!

> From: "Laws, Peter C." <plaws at ou.edu>
> Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 16:56:26 +0000
> Sender: bind-users-bounces+oberman=es.net at lists.isc.org
> 
> Well aware of that, but we have RedHat support so we're stuck with
> that given that the alternatives are self-supporting BIND (which you
> could argue I'm doing right now!) or going with a 3rd party.  Given
> the economy, I'm pleased we're keeping RH support.

While all of our (public) servers run on FreeBSD which has not shipped
with 9.3 for a long time, we always run a near-current ISC release of
BIND.  The amount of support needed is trivial and I sleep much better at
night that way.

Yes, depending on the integration of your back-office DNS
management/DNSSEC, it might be less so for some. Keeping the support of
BIND on our public servers mostly unrelated to the IPAM and DNSSEC stuff
has really not been hard.

In the time it took me to send my reply, I could have updated BIND on
all of our public servers and I don't have to upgrade all that often. I
think running 9.3 is false economy. DNS is just too important.
-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman at es.net			Phone: +1 510 486-8634
Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4  EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751