Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: [NANOG] Re: Reasons why BIND isn't being upgraded

  • From: Derek J. Balling
  • Date: Thu Feb 01 22:19:43 2001

At 3:54 AM +0100 2/2/01, Pim van Riezen wrote:
>I also seriously counter your claim that having this bracket on the next
>line is in any way bogus. It's visually superior to the now enforced
>option of having it on the same line. There is nothing in the parser not
>to understand it. Spreading data across lines is commonly accepted in a
>lot of configuration languages and bind has been among this in all
>versions I previously ran. Why is that now suddenly bogus?

According to RFC1035, it's ALWAYS been bogus. It's just been a bug that
BIND's parser that accepted the bogus data.

It's funny that when I reported this as a bug when bind9 testing was going
on, ISC was like "it accepts paren on the next line?" ... since bind9 was
written from scratch, it didn't inherit the legacy bogosity of accepting
\n(, and crapped out, just as 8.2.3 did.  It appears that my (and others,
I'm sure) bug report on 9.0.0beta-whatever caused the re-evaluation of the
8.2.x codebase to fix that bug in 8.x.

So I guess I'll apologize for opening my trap. ;-)


|  | "Conan! What is best in life?"          |
|  Derek J. Balling   | "To crush your enemies, see them        |
|                     |    driven before you, and to hear the   |
|                     |    lamentation of their women!"         |

Discussion Communities

About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home

Merit Network, Inc.