Re: fe80 errors - thousands

2014-06-06 Thread Noel Butler
On Sat, 2014-06-07 at 13:35 +1000, Edwardo Garcia wrote: > Halo, > in recent week we have see fill daemon_log of this errors, is way to > fix? > I do wrong? > > you are doing nothing wrong, the idiot advertising fe80 is the one doing it wrong in the meantime you could add to your named.conf -

Re: SPF RR type

2014-06-06 Thread Noel Butler
On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 12:18 -0400, Kevin Darcy wrote: > Given the heated and bitter debates over the SPF record type (see > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext/current/maillist.html, > search "SPF", around August of last year), I'm thinking that "a couple > years" probably translates i

Re: NO_PIE bind port build fail

2014-06-06 Thread Noel Butler
Not a BSD user, but are you running any sort of extra security enforcement toolsets? PIE is IIRC, Position Independent Executable. On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 19:27 -0400, Rick Dicaire wrote: > Hi folks, in trying to update bind 9.8.7_15 on freebsd 8.4, I get the > following: > > > > ... > ==

fe80 errors - thousands

2014-06-06 Thread Edwardo Garcia
Halo, in recent week we have see fill daemon_log of this errors, is way to fix? I do wrong? socket.c:5367: unexpected error: Jun 2 05:43:53 korali named[2951]: connect(fe80::#53) 22/Invalid argument ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinf

NO_PIE bind port build fail

2014-06-06 Thread Rick Dicaire
Hi folks, in trying to update bind 9.8.7_15 on freebsd 8.4, I get the following: ... Configuration summary: Optional features enabled: Multiprocessi

Re: slave: WARNING: recursion requested but not available

2014-06-06 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 06.06.2014 20:20, schrieb Kevin Darcy: > On 6/6/2014 7:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> Am 06.06.2014 13:28, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas: >>> On 06.06.14 13:13, Reindl Harald wrote: why does in case of asking the slave always come a "WARNING: recursion requested but not available" >

Re: slave: WARNING: recursion requested but not available

2014-06-06 Thread Kevin Darcy
On 6/6/2014 7:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 06.06.2014 13:28, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas: On 06.06.14 13:13, Reindl Harald wrote: why does in case of asking the slave always come a "WARNING: recursion requested but not available" even if you dig a A-record he is authoritative? because you

Re: slave: WARNING: recursion requested but not available

2014-06-06 Thread Barry Margolin
In article , Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 06.06.2014 13:28, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas: > > On 06.06.14 13:13, Reindl Harald wrote: > >> why does in case of asking the slave always come a > >> "WARNING: recursion requested but not available" > >> even if you dig a A-record he is authoritative?

Re: slave: WARNING: recursion requested but not available

2014-06-06 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 06.06.2014 13:40, schrieb Phil Mayers: > On 06/06/14 12:35, Reindl Harald wrote: >> >> Am 06.06.2014 13:28, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas: >>> On 06.06.14 13:13, Reindl Harald wrote: why does in case of asking the slave always come a "WARNING: recursion requested but not available"

Re: slave: WARNING: recursion requested but not available

2014-06-06 Thread Phil Mayers
On 06/06/14 12:35, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 06.06.2014 13:28, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas: On 06.06.14 13:13, Reindl Harald wrote: why does in case of asking the slave always come a "WARNING: recursion requested but not available" even if you dig a A-record he is authoritative? because you

Re: slave: WARNING: recursion requested but not available

2014-06-06 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 06.06.2014 13:28, schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas: > On 06.06.14 13:13, Reindl Harald wrote: >> why does in case of asking the slave always come a >> "WARNING: recursion requested but not available" >> even if you dig a A-record he is authoritative? > > because you request recursion and the ser

Re: slave: WARNING: recursion requested but not available

2014-06-06 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 06.06.14 13:13, Reindl Harald wrote: why does in case of asking the slave always come a "WARNING: recursion requested but not available" even if you dig a A-record he is authoritative? because you request recursion and the server does not provide it. use "dig +norecurse" not to request recu

Re: stub zones

2014-06-06 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 06.06.14 11:50, Cathy Almond wrote: And not forgetting that with recent versions of BIND, you have 'stub' and you have 'static-stub'. The difference is that with static-stub, if the NS/A/ records returned by the authoritative server you've pointed your resolver at don't match the addresse

slave: WARNING: recursion requested but not available

2014-06-06 Thread Reindl Harald
Hi another thing i noticed while debug the cisco zone-transfer troubles: "ns1.thelounge.net" and "ns2.thelounge.net" are authoritative for both domains: * thelounge.net * rhsoft.net MASTER: ns2.thelounge.net SLAVE: ns1.thelounge.net why does in case of asking the slave always come a "WARNING:

Re: stub zones

2014-06-06 Thread Cathy Almond
On 02/06/2014 23:38, John Miller wrote: > So... without stub zones, you know the drill: your local resolver > follows delegation, starting from the root nameservers. Delegation > happens, and life is good. If you're running views, then things work > fine as well: your view just needs to be config

Re: Problem dlz_mysql_driver

2014-06-06 Thread Cathy Almond
On 04/06/2014 08:25, Claudia Koch wrote: > Hello, > > I've a installation of bind 9.4.0 with dlz_mysql_driver and I have a > zone test.de. In this zone I have a record > > *.dev IN A 1.2.3.4 > > With dig a.dev.test.de I've get the answer 1.2.3.4. > > Now I like to do a update to debian 7.0 and

Re: SPF RR type

2014-06-06 Thread J. Thomsen
On Fri, 06 Jun 2014 09:45:56 +1000,Mark Andrews wrote: > >It takes years to do transitions like this. TXT to SPF was actually >ramping up but that is now water under the bridge. > In that case named-compilezone should no longer emit found SPF/TXT record but no SPF/SPF record found, add match

Re: SPF RR type

2014-06-06 Thread Doug Barton
Please don't reply to a message on the list and change the subject line. Doing so causes your new topic to show "under" the previous one for those using mail readers that thread properly, and may cause your message to be missed altogether if someone has blocked that thread. Instead, save the l