Re: DNS

Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 03:13:58PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> it seems like a great way to invite breakins.  (Black hat: "whaddya
>> know, their DNS server is down, maybe I can inject some bogus info.")
> 
> If we ever have a complete DNS outage, then we need more DNS servers.  Which
> reminds me, I had promised to try to get postgresql.org on the afilias name
> server infrastructure (which, I assure you, had better _not_ ever be down). 
> Are people still interested in that?

What does that actually mean?

A well-distributed and always-up secondary? Or the master as well,
including a new management system?

//Magnus