DNS: BIND vs. WinDNS

[Star]

> Is the real issue managing BIND, or is the real issue that
> everybody
> there hates nix, and BIND management is just the latest
> excuse to get
> rid of nix?

Currently, it's some of each.  There is definately a fear of using something
that's not understood.  It's not so much a matter of trying to force it down
their throats as, it's already in place, it's solid, ~and~ it works.  The
problem stems from management in that we have to move this out to our
"Builds Team" for adding and removing CNAMEs etc, as there are litterally
scores of such changes a day.  The guys in the Systems Group (those
responsible for the management of these machines overall) simply can't keep
up with the level of requests coming forward.  Management is of the opinion
that "We know windows, therefore we'll go that route" and it's hard to
argue.  There's lots of expertice in house for dealing with Windows machine
and such moving forward.

The discussion today, ran to the idea my group (meaning me and one other
guy) proposed to use Windows boxes in the core (non-public) as masters for
the zones and have the edge (public) servers setup as slave bind boxes to
the core servers.  No capital outlay for that one, just keep the bind boxes
as they are and change them to be slaves.  Our build-monkeys get to have a
cute MS style interface to screw up instead (okay, okay, it's not ~quite~
that bad) and don't have to deal with VI (don't get me going on the webmin
conversation).  We don't add domains often enough for it to be a major
concern, and their addition can remain with the Systems group.  It's got
it's merits, but MGT is looking for numbers to see if that kind of "paradigm
shift" (direct quote) is necessary.

Sadly, offloading this to a provider is just not an option as we have to
have 24x7 absolute accountability (a.k.a. someone to skin) when things
break.  Not to mention, we'll need, literally, instant responsiveness to
changes and the ability to deal with the number of requests we do.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20051213/a445757c/attachment.html