Yellowdog and running a BIND/DNS Server

[Eric Dunbar]

On 5/25/05, Geert Janssens <geert.janssens3 at pandora.be> wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 May 2005 13:43, Eric Dunbar wrote:
> > [Reply is OT]
> >
> > Anyway, here's the off-topic thought (may or may not apply to your
> > situation).
> >
> > Oftentimes orgs try to "re-use" old hardware by running Linux/BSD to
> > save a bit of cash. When you consider the expense of salaries related
> > to setting up the "free" software I suspect it would've often been
<snip>
> >
> Is this off topic thought meant to say: "You'd better buy OS X server and
> configure its DNS server than install linux on a somewhat older machine and
> configure bind because with the linux solution you will have to spend much
> more time getting things running right." ?

It depends on how much time you spend setting it up and how much your
time is worth to you/your org. Setting up my home server on YDL
doesn't require a cost-benefit analysis. It's a learning experience so
I have no need to 'save costs' and I gain (slightly) if there *are*
problems. If I valued my time at some hourly rate, however, I'd get OS
X server without even thinking twice about it. If Apple supports the
hardware, you have a guarantee of compatibility. No headaches. No
having to find out what kernel to run to get X11 running or which G5
kernel to patch. But, that's also the fun of OSS like YDL. You get to
trouble-shoot and learn about the guts (which you don't if your system
"just works").

> If that is what the thought is about, I wonder why that would be. I don't know
> how to configure OS X's DNS server, since I don't have Mac OS X server. I'm
> sure it has a fancy GUI.
> 
> But GUI or CLI, configuring DNS is basically a matter of entering all the IP
> addresses and corresponding names for all the machines in your network. Some
> would argue a GUI slows this down.
> 
> If the command line interface is daunting, under linux you can use webmin to
> configure bind via a GUI.
> 
> So, maybe I'm missing something but I don't really see how the linux solution
> in this case would cost more salary?

It all depends on how long it would take. OS X is designed to be a
network server with minimal support needs. Linux is a far cry from
minimal in that department so, unless you have a particular reason for
running OSS (whether that be ideological, requirement to modify code,
etc) and you *also* have to pay for salaries to get and keep things up
and running, you're better off with a 'bought' solution (and, for Macs
that's OS X Server).

> Then again, you statement might have been more generic. In which case my
> answer would be, "it depends on the case..."

'zacketly.