On 10/19/2012 07:25 PM, John Miller wrote:
Here's a question, however: how does one get probes working for a
transparent LB setup? If an rserver listens for connections on all
interfaces, then probes work fine, but return traffic from the uses the
machine's default IP (not the VIP that was orig
On 10/24/2012 10:17 PM, Carsten Strotmann wrote:
my experience is that it is safe to place clients in either a DNS domain
with the same name as the AD domain, or in a subdomain of the AD
domain.
What does "place" mean, exactly?
Bear in mind that, unfortunately, Microsoft chose to embed DNS na
Hello Phil,
Phil Mayers writes:
> Our experience is that this can cause (minor) problems.
>
> The basic issue is that, if you have an AD realm:
>
> EXAMPLE.COM
>
> ...and a machine:
>
> foo
>
> ...then windows tries very hard to stick its fingers in its ears,
> shout "la la I am not listening"
Hello Aaron,
Aaron Thompson writes:
> I have little experience in the AD arena for DNS/DHCP. Without being
> a too loaded question, with your experience is it possible or common
> to have a very knowledgeable understanding of the performance and
> health of an AD system similar to a BIND syst
On 24/10/12 16:54, Kevin Darcy wrote:
Why do you feel the need to register clients in your AD domain at all?
We register our clients outside of the AD domain via the DHCP server;
Our experience is that this can cause (minor) problems.
The basic issue is that, if you have an AD realm:
EXAMPLE
Alan Clegg wrote:
>
> This message was added by general recognition that being able to rebuild
> a "drop-in" binary for BIND when you didn't have access to the build
> directory (where the config.log contains the information) was a good
> thing.
>
> I, for one, see no reason to suppress this messa
On Oct 24, 2012, at 6:50 AM, Nicholas F Miller wrote:
> Scavenging is a concern but we didn't have much choice. Our AD is only one of
> many subdomains and our DHCP spans all of them. If we used DHCP for DDNS
> records we wouldn't be guaranteed unique names. By limiting DDNS to just the
> AD we
On Oct 23, 2012, at 5:17 PM, Christian Tardif wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a strange BIND behaviour I don't know how to handle. As I don't
> exactly know how to describe it, I'll rather explain what I did and what
> happens. But not quite easy to follow.
>
> In my tests, I have two servers with BIN
On 10/24/2012 9:50 AM, Nicholas F Miller wrote:
On Oct 24, 2012, at 7:12 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
We use Bind for all DNS including DDNS for our AD. We use GSS-TSIG to
control what record types and machines can make dynamic updates to our AD
zone. We use ISC's DHCP but don't allow it
In article ,
Christian Tardif wrote:
> SiteA is a recursive name server. I've been able to prove that it does
> not behave correctly under certain circumstances by hitting it with a
> simple request: asking it to give me NS records for a certain subdomain
> for which it's primary for the base
On Oct 24, 2012, at 7:12 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>> We use Bind for all DNS including DDNS for our AD. We use GSS-TSIG to
>> control what record types and machines can make dynamic updates to our AD
>> zone. We use ISC's DHCP but don't allow it to do DNS updates since we use
>> GSS-TSIG
On 22.10.12 13:39, Nicholas F Miller wrote:
We use Bind for all DNS including DDNS for our AD. We use GSS-TSIG to
control what record types and machines can make dynamic updates to our AD
zone. We use ISC's DHCP but don't allow it to do DNS updates since we use
GSS-TSIG at the client level inste
12 matches
Mail list logo
