In message <7610864823c0d04d89342623a3adc9de2e339...@hopple.countryday.net>, "S
pain, Dr. Jeffry A." writes:
> >> Changing the second line ('@ 10800 IN NS @') to '@ 10800 IN NS localhost=
> .' eliminates the errors.
> > The built in empty zone processing is aware of the special case of NS rec=
> ords without address records. The generic zone processing rules treat this=
> as a error condition.
>
> Just for clarification, do I understand correctly that if none of the empty=
> zones described in RFC 6303 are set up explicitly in the bind 9.9.0 config=
> uration file, then bind 9.9.0 will process them as such anyway using built-=
> in generic zone processing rules?
Yes. It does do some sanity checks to work out if it is sensible
to enable them. You can disable them individually or as a group.
You can force them to enabled with.
zone <name> {
type master;
database "builtin empty <server> <contact>";
dialup no;
notify no;
};
Note: you are still subject to NS must have a address checks doing
it this way.
> >> (Empty zone 255.255.255.255.in-addr.arpa (RFC 6303) vs. 255.in-addr.arpa=
> . (RFC 1912)
> > BCP 163 (RFC 6303) is based on BCP 153 (RFC 5735) which trumps RFC 1912.
>
> RFC 5735 allocates 240.0.0.0/4, which would include 255.0.0.0/8 except for =
> 255.255.255.255, as "Reserved for Future Use". Based on this, it makes sens=
> e to me not to have an empty zone for 255.in-addr.arpa.
>
> Thanks. Jeff.
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
