I'm receiving e-mail from people who writes to
comp-protocols-dns-b...@isc.org , but I don't remember to be subscribed
to a list with that address.
Without this list's prefix in the subject, I don't see if I'm receiving
those messages because of my subscription to "bind-users" or it's spam.
Al 0
> You don't need --with-pkcs11 unless you're planning to use a
> cryptographic accelerator
> or hardware service module, and you'd have had to build a special
> version of OpenSSL
> for that. Remove it from the configure options and you should be fine.
Did a quick rebuild and yes Sir, runs lik
Because it would be a waste of a machine. We only host about 30 domains. The
load is negligible.
Jeff
On Jun 26, 2013, at 11:51 PM, Mike Hale wrote:
> Dude, why aren't you running your authoritative name servers on a
> dedicated box or VM using a dedicated server OS? Not asking to be a
>
Interesting, the pcap that was posted previously showed some odd errors
around udp checksums, some showed valid, some showed invalid. With
modern NICs it's not uncommon to see them all invalid due to checksum
offloading, but the mix of valid and invalid was odd.
Doug
On 06/26/2013 09:58 PM,
I am running a demo of the Canit anti-spam software from Roaring Penguin
Software as an appliance (ISO) inside of Virtual Box for OSX. I was getting a
lot of these errors in the system logs:
6/26/13 11:38:37 PM kernel in_delayed_cksum_offset: ip_len 48640 (190)
doesn't match actual length
> This build of OpenSSL 1.0.1e was fully tested and passed all tests so I am
> thinking
> that an option to the build of bind is the issue here. Probably
> "--with-pkcs11" .
>
> If I don't have that option am I totally shafted for DNSSEC ?
You don't need --with-pkcs11 unless you're plannin
Yes, seems fine now. Can you share more information about what it was
you turned off? Sounds odd, but the results speak for themselves.
Doug
On 06/26/2013 09:39 PM, SH Development wrote:
Sure could use some direction about where to start looking. I "thought" I had
everything working for the
Sure could use some direction about where to start looking. I "thought" I had
everything working for the last few years, but now I'm beginning to question
how long I've had a problem.
The setup is OSX running BIND 9.9.3-P1 on a static IP, no firewall, no router,
just straight to the internet.
# /opt/adbs/sbin/named -u named -c /etc/opt/adbs/named/named.conf -4 -d 2 -f -g
-n 1
27-Jun-2013 03:43:27.243 starting BIND 9.9.3-P1 -u named -c
/etc/opt/adbs/named/named.conf -4 -d 2 -f -g -n 1
27-Jun-2013 03:43:27.246 built with '--build=sparc-sun-solaris2.10'
'--host=sparc-sun-solaris2.10' '
On 06/26/2013 06:50 PM, SH Development wrote:
Okay, so I got to it sooner than I thought. So, could you take a look at:
starionhost.net
stariontech.com
starionline.com
Any one of those, but they should all be identical now and on some new
secondary DNS.
The delegations are now identical, an
Okay, so I got to it sooner than I thought. So, could you take a look at:
starionhost.net
stariontech.com
starionline.com
Any one of those, but they should all be identical now and on some new
secondary DNS.
Jeff
On Jun 26, 2013, at 8:16 PM, SH Development wrote:
> Whoa...slow down guys.
Whoa...slow down guys. I took ns2.starionhost.net offline and am in the middle
of re-arranging my secondary services. Let me finish twiddling around with it
in the next day or two, and I'll post a note when I'm done. THEN take a look
at it. I'm curious to know if you all see any changes at t
On 06/26/2013 07:54 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
All very interesting, but I'm afraid at my level of expertise on DNS,
I'm
not following. If I'm broken, how do I attempt to fix? Someone
mentioned
that our ns1.starionhost.net was not authoritative. How does one even
decide that? As far as
In message , Barry
Margolin writes:
> P.S. I read this list through the comp.protocols.dns.bind newsgroup.
> Does anyone know why some messages, like Ryan's, show up with control
> characters replaced by weird characters (e.g. TAB turns into daggers)?
> Can something be fixed in the mail-to-ne
In article ,
RYAN CHERVENKA wrote:
> Barry,
The Ubuntu server is delegating a sub-domain to the LB. The LB is
> authoritative for the domain and is responding to client requests correctly.
> I removed the @ ÝIN ::1 from the db file within the primary domain and
> the response was sent b
Barry,
The Ubuntu server is delegating a sub-domain to the LB. The LB is authoritative
for the domain and is responding to client requests correctly. I removed the @
IN ::1 from the db file within the primary domain and the response was
sent back to the client from the ubuntu server. Leav
Oops, images were too bighere's links.
- Original Message -
> >> All very interesting, but I'm afraid at my level of expertise on
> >> DNS, I'm
> >> not following. If I'm broken, how do I attempt to fix? Someone
> >> mentioned
> >> that our ns1.starionhost.net was not authoritative.
Hello Alok,
Something may have changed at the name servers for
bvt-rhe63-32s.ipv6domain.com.
Right now, both ns.addpac.co.kr (61.33.161.2) and ns.addpac.com (61.33.161.2)
are returning NXDOMAIN for bvt-rhe63-32s.ipv6domain.com. The IP happily returns
the SOA for ipv6domain.com using either NS
All very interesting, but I'm afraid at my level of expertise on DNS, I'm
not following. If I'm broken, how do I attempt to fix? Someone mentioned
that our ns1.starionhost.net was not authoritative. How does one even
decide that? As far as I know I haven't had any issues until now...
On Ju
In article ,
RYAN CHERVENKA wrote:
> I currently have a domain example.com authoritative on my Ubuntu server and
> it is delegating gslb.example.com to my load balancer.Ý
www.example.com is a
> CNAME for www.gslb.example.comÝ
Gslb.example.com has an NS record pointing to
> the LB
Client sen
Hi Guys,
I have one query, while querying DNS for SOA record for FQDN it is
segment-faulting in centos-6.3, any clue?
Pasting below the trace:
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread 0xb7fe3b70 (LWP 7093)]
[New Thread 0xb75e2b70 (LWP 7094)]
[New Thread 0xb6be1b70 (LWP 7095)]
[N
Hi,
we are proud to announce the new 2.2.0 release of Netmagis:
http://netmagis.org
This long awaited release includes, among other new features, support
for DNS views, shorter DNS zone generation latency, and a new search
facility. Database schema (tables and columns) have all been trans
22 matches
Mail list logo
