On Jun 23, 2009, at 3:16 PM, Scott Haneda wrote:
Good observation. This is a long standing issue that I assumed was
solved. Named on OS X will go deaf on port 53 tcp for some reason.
I just kicked it, and now I can tcp dig it.
$dig +tcp sugardimplesdesigns.com SOA @ns1.hostwizard.com +sho
JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
At Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:30:42 +0400,
Dmitry Rybin wrote:
Please try 9.6.1b1, which we expect to be released next week. It has a
new experimental feature just for that purpose:
Is this feature going to be back ported to 9.4 and 9.5 releases as well?
For 9.5, yes.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Yes the updates are slow because we had some disasters with the
> automation but we intend to turn that on again soon. That being
> said you really do need to check that the new data has been published
> before you start the wait periods. Th
In message , R Dicair
e writes:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> >
> >Even if the update were published on the master instananeo=
> usly
> >you still need to wait for the zone to transfer to all the
> >slaves and for the old DLV records to timeout of
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> Even if the update were published on the master instananeously
> you still need to wait for the zone to transfer to all the
> slaves and for the old DLV records to timeout of caches.
Even 24 hrs after? My zone ttls are s
BIND 9.7.0a1 is now available.
BIND 9.7.0a1 is the FIRST ALPHA release of BIND 9.7.0.
Overview:
This is a technology preview of new functionality to be
included in BIND 9.7.0. Not all new functionality is in
place. APIs and configuration syntax are not
In message , Chris Tho
mpson writes:
> On Jun 23 2009, R Dicaire wrote:
>
> >Hi folks...Yesterday I performed a DNSSEC KSK rollover, updated DLV
> >with the new keys, and confirmed successful updates to DLV via their
> >script. According to DLV all zones are good. Upon completing this, I
> >then
On Jun 23, 2009, at 3:01 PM, Hauke Lampe wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote:
$dig sugardimplesdesigns.com SOA @ns1.hostwizard.com +short
Do you block 53/tcp anywhere on the path to your nameserver?
It rejects TCP queries:
| dig +tcp sugardimplesdesigns.com SOA @ns1.hostwizard.com +short
| ;; Connect
Scott Haneda wrote:
> $dig sugardimplesdesigns.com SOA @ns1.hostwizard.com +short
Do you block 53/tcp anywhere on the path to your nameserver?
It rejects TCP queries:
| dig +tcp sugardimplesdesigns.com SOA @ns1.hostwizard.com +short
| ;; Connection to 64.84.37.14#53(64.84.37.14) for
sugardimples
This has been an issue for far too long, though I solved it, but it
rears it's head again.
Example:
$dig sugardimplesdesigns.com SOA @ns1.hostwizard.com +short
ns1.hostwizard.com. scott.hostwizard.com. 2009062206 28800 7200
2419200 3600
$dig sugardimplesdesigns.com SOA @ns0.nacio.com +short
On Jun 22, 2009, at 9:17 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
What it your OS and which hardware?
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
It's Linux: CentOS 5.3 i386.
Both are running under vmware ESXi 3
On Jun 23 2009, R Dicaire wrote:
Hi folks...Yesterday I performed a DNSSEC KSK rollover, updated DLV
with the new keys, and confirmed successful updates to DLV via their
script. According to DLV all zones are good. Upon completing this, I
then removed the old keys from the DLV db for each zone I
Hi folks...Yesterday I performed a DNSSEC KSK rollover, updated DLV
with the new keys, and confirmed successful updates to DLV via their
script. According to DLV all zones are good. Upon completing this, I
then removed the old keys from the DLV db for each zone I have
registered.
Now when I attempt
Many thanks
Ejaz
-Original Message-
From: ma...@isc.org [mailto:ma...@isc.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 10:42 AM
To: Mohammed Ejaz
Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: third dns server
In message , "Mohammed
Ejaz"
writes:
>
> We have been receiving complain by our client, d
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:31:16AM +0300,
Mohammed Ejaz wrote
a message of 234 lines which said:
> We have been receiving complain by our client, during the primary
> DNS servers are down that is ns1.xyz and ns2.xyz is down. And as per
> the configuration at saudinic.net.sa (domain Registrar C
In message , "Mohammed Ejaz"
writes:
>
> We have been receiving complain by our client, during the primary DNS
> servers are down that is ns1.xyz and ns2.xyz is down. And as per the
> configuration at saudinic.net.sa (domain Registrar Company) we were
> expecting that during the outage of primar
We have been receiving complain by our client, during the primary DNS
servers are down that is ns1.xyz and ns2.xyz is down. And as per the
configuration at saudinic.net.sa (domain Registrar Company) we were
expecting that during the outage of primary name servers then ns3.abc will
handle all the re
17 matches
Mail list logo
