Thanks Shane,
I have re-applied previous changes to source files and that has silenced
them again in meantime.
Cheers
Noel
On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 17:05 +0100, Shane Kerr wrote:
> Noel,
>
> On Thursday, 2012-12-06 11:03:24 +1000,
> Noel Butler wrote:
> > Hi Shane, Mark, Evan
> >
> > On Tue, 2
In message
, Daniele
Imbrogino writes:
> I'm testing new configuration on VirtualBox following the advice of not
> forwarding.
> Furthermore, I exclude any reference to DNSSEC.
>
> So, in these conditions and assuming an empty cache, if I query for a
> remote domain name, my server should query
My next move would be to look for issues in the network, I would look at
what wireshark can sniff out. I would look for packets with errors. The
purpose is to find out if the network is mangling packets.
On 06/12/12 16:46, Daniele Imbrogino wrote:
> I'm testing new configuration on VirtualBox fol
Thank you very much learnt a new thing too
Mark Andrews ha scritto:
>
>In message <50bfaba3.5040...@dougbarton.us>, Doug Barton writes:
>> On 12/05/2012 11:29 AM, fddi wrote:
>> > Hello, I have a domain called mydomain.org
>> >
>> > I would need a way to allow access with nsupdate not to the en
> Yup, I knew all of that and that is what I have always done. This morning
> I got things to work by skipping the -j option of gmake to do parallel
> compiles, and the tests then worked.
Neat!
> Once I didn't do the parallel compile (-j2), the tests worked. But I did
> not see any failures fro
Noel,
On Thursday, 2012-12-06 11:03:24 +1000,
Noel Butler wrote:
> Hi Shane, Mark, Evan
>
> On Tue, 2012-10-16 at 08:22 +0200, Shane Kerr wrote:
> >
> > These changes are in our review queue now, so will go in future
> > releases.
>
>
> I guess this was not pushed in? After update to 9.9.2-
Evan,
Yup, I knew all of that and that is what I have always done. This morning
I got things to work by skipping the -j option of gmake to do parallel compiles,
and the tests then worked.
Before I always did:
configure
gmake -j2
ifconfig.sh up (as root)
gmake test
Once I didn't do the parallel
I'm testing new configuration on VirtualBox following the advice of not
forwarding.
Furthermore, I exclude any reference to DNSSEC.
So, in these conditions and assuming an empty cache, if I query for a
remote domain name, my server should query a root-server and then iterate,
right?
Well, Wireshar
Jeff Earickson wrote:
> The "make test" stuff is failing miserably for me on Linux (Redhat
> 6.3, x64) with 9.9.2-P1:
I'm pretty sure you haven't set up the local addresses the test servers
need to run on. From the top of the bind9 tree, run the command:
$ sudo sh bin/tests/system/ifcon
No, I don't.
Just for this reason I can't have a cache dump.
Now, in /var, it works!
2012/12/6 Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>
>
> I hope you did not allow BIND writing to /etc...
> (/etc should be writable by admins, not daemons, that's why we use /var)
>
>
On 05.12.12 17:28, David Hall wrote:
Question 1:
In our secondary / slave name servers we specify the master name servers in
the normal manner:
zone mysample.me.uk { type slave; file "m/y/db.mysample.me.uk"; masters {
10.10.100.12; 10.10.101.12; 10.10.102.5; }; };
What I have found is that the or
Jeff,
On Wednesday, 2012-12-05 09:27:10 -0500,
Jeff Earickson wrote:
>
> The "make test" stuff is failing miserably for me on Linux (Redhat
> 6.3, x64) with 9.9.2-P1:
Someone suggested to me:
There should be *.run (maybe tests/system/*/*/*.run) files that will
have the run-time log output.
On 05.12.12 15:07, Daniele Imbrogino wrote:
Finally I solved it!
The problem was in the write permission of /etc, while in /var/cache/bind
it works perfectly!
Thank you for the assistance!
I hope you did not allow BIND writing to /etc...
(/etc should be writable by admins, not daemons, that's w
Karl Auer wrote on 12/05/2012 06:44:01 PM:
> This may be a silly question, but are SPF records supposed to be
> supported in reverse zones? I'm thinking of a mail server that has no
> entry in the DNS.
THe SPF query is looking for the sender's domain, not the sender's server,
so the record woul
Dan Mahoney wrote on 12/05/2012 06:52:43 PM:
> I can't even imagine what spamfilters would think of such an address. :)
To quotes some annoying TV ads here in the US:
"REJECTED!"
Confidentiality Notice:
This electronic message and any attachments may contain confidential or
privile
15 matches
Mail list logo
