In message ,
TMK writes:
> Dears,
>
> Probably this the thousand time you get these question. but our bind server
> have slow response time for the non-cached entries.
>
> I have run dig with +trace option and below is the result
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.8.0-P2 <<>> @127.0.0.1 www.google.com +trace
>
I think in use views with diferent zones files, all for same domain, no
recursive querys, one view for each network/AS that my bgp router know.
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> 24.08.2011 08:04, sky shade пишет:
>>
>>> I like to know if bind 9.8 have a limit of vie
Dears,
Probably this the thousand time you get these question. but our bind server
have slow response time for the non-cached entries.
I have run dig with +trace option and below is the result
; <<>> DiG 9.8.0-P2 <<>> @127.0.0.1 www.google.com +trace
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
.
In message <4e5b6098.80...@pernau.at>, Klaus Darilion writes:
> Hi!
>
> I have 9.7.0-P1 as slave configured with two masters: M1 and M2. M2 is
> currently down.
>
> When M1 sends a NOTIFY to inform the salve of the new zone, bind starts
> querying for the SOA record at M2. As M2 is down, bind se
>
> A zone is atomically either static or dynamic. There is no mix.
Seems it's the matter of the way of implementation, not the RFCs'
restrictions, doesn't it? Why don't propose it for implementing then?
2011/8/29 Chris Buxton
> A zone is atomically either static or dynamic. There is no mix.
>
A zone is atomically either static or dynamic. There is no mix.
You can freeze a dynamic zone, rendering it temporarily static, and then
hand-edit the zone file. This has several side effects, including that incoming
updates are dropped while the zone is frozen.
You can consider breaking the zo
Hello everybody,
I would like to use DDNS updates for the certain zone. But I also want to
configure a part of it statically.
However, BIND makes a big mess-up in my zone file after several dynamic
updates, which makes editing it not very handy. I also can't add any static
record because they wou
Hi!
I have 9.7.0-P1 as slave configured with two masters: M1 and M2. M2 is
currently down.
When M1 sends a NOTIFY to inform the salve of the new zone, bind starts
querying for the SOA record at M2. As M2 is down, bind sends
retransmissions and tries it several times. It takes up to 2 minutes
unti
8 matches
Mail list logo