Re: nsupdate, dnssec, minimum ttl

2010-06-17 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <4c1a7319.3010...@usc.edu>, Eric Ham writes: > I'm using 9.7.0-P2 to test with dynamic updates via nsupdate along with > setting up dnssec. So far my tests are working well with dynamic updates > and validation of the dnssec records, but I have a question on how the > TTL is set for

Re: nsupdate, dnssec, minimum ttl

2010-06-17 Thread Casey Deccio
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Eric Ham wrote: > > It would appear that the NSEC and RRSIG NSEC TTLs are set to my example.com > zone's minimum TTL which is 86400 instead of inheriting the TTL I set of 7200. > >From RFC 4034 (section 4): The NSEC RR SHOULD have the same TTL value as the

nsupdate, dnssec, minimum ttl

2010-06-17 Thread Eric Ham
I'm using 9.7.0-P2 to test with dynamic updates via nsupdate along with setting up dnssec. So far my tests are working well with dynamic updates and validation of the dnssec records, but I have a question on how the TTL is set for the NSEC and RRSIG NSEC records. As a test, when I do the follo

Re: out of memory Errors

2010-06-17 Thread Stacey Jonathan Marshall - Solaris Software
On 06/17/10 16:50, Prabhat Rana wrote: I'm running BIND 9.6.1-P1 in a Solaris 10 server. There is a total of 32G of physical memory and at any given time about 20G is free. However, named keeps on throwing "out of memory" errors. When these error occurs in syslog, although named is still runni

Re: out of memory Errors

2010-06-17 Thread Kevin Darcy
On 6/17/2010 11:50 AM, Prabhat Rana wrote: I'm running BIND 9.6.1-P1 in a Solaris 10 server. There is a total of 32G of physical memory and at any given time about 20G is free. However, named keeps on throwing "out of memory" errors. When these error occurs in syslog, although named is still r

out of memory Errors

2010-06-17 Thread Prabhat Rana
I'm running BIND 9.6.1-P1 in a Solaris 10 server. There is a total of 32G of physical memory and at any given time about 20G is free. However, named keeps on throwing "out of memory" errors. When these error occurs in syslog, although named is still running it goes in a hung state. I noticed th

Re: Running both a cache-only and an authoritative server on the same server

2010-06-17 Thread Phil Mayers
On 17/06/10 14:36, Torsten wrote: The important part seems to be "on a secondary IP" and afaik listen-on statements don't work inside of view statements. That leaves you with running two seperate instances of Bind on the same server. Eh?. You simply do: options { listen-on { ip-primary; ip

Re: Running both a cache-only and an authoritative server on the same server

2010-06-17 Thread David Forrest
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010, Torsten wrote: Am Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:35:38 +0100 schrieb Phil Mayers : On 17/06/10 12:39, Jørn Skjerven wrote: Hi! I've tried to search the archive for for this, but could not find anything relevant. We currently run a server with an authoritative set for domains. We w

Re: Running both a cache-only and an authoritative server on the same server

2010-06-17 Thread Torsten
Am Thu, 17 Jun 2010 08:43:32 -0500 schrieb Peter Laws : > On 06/17/10 08:36, Torsten wrote: > > Am Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:35:38 +0100 > > schrieb Phil Mayers: > > > >> On 17/06/10 12:39, Jørn Skjerven wrote: > > >>> Is it possible to achieve this in a single named.conf, or is it > >>> recommended to

RE: Running both a cache-only and an authoritative server on thesame server

2010-06-17 Thread Lightner, Jeff
No but you set notify-source and transfer-source to the IP of the NIC that you want to handle the view. That effectively restricts the traffic for that view to the specific NIC. (Note this is the NIC's internal IP not any NAT ip you might have redirected to that internal IP.) -Original Me

Re: Running both a cache-only and an authoritative server on the same server

2010-06-17 Thread Peter Laws
On 06/17/10 08:36, Torsten wrote: Am Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:35:38 +0100 schrieb Phil Mayers: On 17/06/10 12:39, Jørn Skjerven wrote: Is it possible to achieve this in a single named.conf, or is it recommended to run two instances of bind, each with a different listen-on statement? Sure. Use

Re: Running both a cache-only and an authoritative server on the same server

2010-06-17 Thread Torsten
Am Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:35:38 +0100 schrieb Phil Mayers : > On 17/06/10 12:39, Jørn Skjerven wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I've tried to search the archive for for this, but could not find > > anything relevant. > > > > We currently run a server with an authoritative set for domains. We > > want to use th

Re: Running both a cache-only and an authoritative server on the same server

2010-06-17 Thread Phil Mayers
On 17/06/10 12:39, Jørn Skjerven wrote: Hi! I've tried to search the archive for for this, but could not find anything relevant. We currently run a server with an authoritative set for domains. We want to use the same server as a cache-only DNS for other customers as well on a secondary IP. Is

Re: Running both a cache-only and an authoritative server on the same server

2010-06-17 Thread Phil Mayers
On 17/06/10 13:35, Phil Mayers wrote: On 17/06/10 12:39, Jørn Skjerven wrote: Hi! I've tried to search the archive for for this, but could not find anything relevant. We currently run a server with an authoritative set for domains. We want to use the same server as a cache-only DNS for other c

Running both a cache-only and an authoritative server on the same server

2010-06-17 Thread Jørn Skjerven
Hi! I've tried to search the archive for for this, but could not find anything relevant. We currently run a server with an authoritative set for domains. We want to use the same server as a cache-only DNS for other customers as well on a secondary IP. Is it possible to achieve this in a single n