On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 06:34:59AM -0400, Skip Ford wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
> > In an effort to find some kind of balance (I won't even try to say
> > "consensus") between those who hate the idea of slaving the root
> > zones, those who like the idea but don't want it to be the default,
> > and those who like the idea, I've made the following change:
> >
> > 1. Change the default behavior back to using a hint zone for the root.
> > 2. Leave the root slave zone config as a commented out example.
> > 3. Remove the B and F root servers from the example at the request of
> > their operators.
> >
> > I hope that we can now dial down the volume on the meta-issue of how
> > the change was done, and focus on the operational issues of whether
> > it's a good idea or not.

>
> Thanks. I'm afraid the consensus has to come from the operators,
> not from FreeBSD folks.
>
> If the operators were required to support it, I think everyone
> should slave the roots, not just those running busy servers. Just
> like I'd think everyone should sync with stratum-1 servers if
> those operators supported everyone doing that.


pool.root-servers.net sounds like a good idea :-)

Edwin
--
Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.mavetju.org
edwin@mavetju.org | Weblog: http://www.mavetju.org/weblog/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/lis...freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"