At Mon, 7 Mar 2016 09:58:46 +0900, Manabu Sonoda <manab...@iij.ad.jp> wrote:
> > So I'm wondering: is this something odd you just happen to find in a > > test environment or something, or is there any practical issue because > > of that? > That found product environment... > Our full resolver was sometimes return the CNAME record. > That parent zone TTL is greater than child zone TTL. > > I known this is miss-configuration that NS Delegation. > Named-checkzone returns errors that parent zone includes ns rcodes for child. > and named can't load zonefile this case. Ah, so your real intent in this thread is to propose an additional sanity check in, e.g., named-checkconf -z (I don't think named-checkzone can be used for this as it focuses on a single zone content) so that it can detect an obvious missing NS from an ancestor to a descendant. I think that makes sense in general, if not for this particular operational error. Maybe IIJ can fund the extension:-) -- JINMEI, Tatuya _______________________________________________ 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
