Hi
So, perhaps I need to update the bind package.
Can anyone suggest, how can I install updated bind rpm in RHEL6.0?
Sincerely Yours
---
Md. Mahbubul Alam Reyad
Assistant Manager
CORE-IP Network || Technology
Cell: +880 1976672281 || Skype: ne
Hello BIND users,
When the "GHOST" vulnerability in GNU libc was disclosed, we received
many questions from customers and users about how BIND was affected.
Our official position is, as always, that operators should upgrade all
linked libraries to unaffected versions, regardless of whether BIND c
Possible yes but I'd suspect it had been addressed if it were severe enough - I
haven't actually looked at it. Another poster suggested a later update to
BIND that is available in RHEL repository that may have addressed it if the
version the OP has doesn't.
I just wanted to make the note abou
Okay, sorry, did not know about the backporting.
Still, isn't it possible that this old bug is still present in this
version of RHEL6?
--
S pozdravem,
Daniel Ryšlink
System Administrator
Dial Telecom a. s.
Křižíkova 36a/237
186 00 Praha 3, Česká Republika
Tel.:+420.226204627
daniel.rysl...@di
On RHEL the kernel doesn't change within the main release (RHEL6) in this case
will always be 2.6.32-xx and RHEL does the support including back porting
bug and security fixes into their extended release (which isn't the same as the
base kernel). They do the same thing for the BIND release
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 12:04 +, Md. Mahbubul Alam Reyad wrote:
> Its bind-9.8.2-0.23 and the OS is Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server
> release 6.0 (kernel- 2.6.32-431.17.1.el6.x86_64)
yum list bind --showduplicates
Available Packages
bind.x86_64 32
Hello
What uncle Google found for me:
http://www.bind9.net/BIND-FAQ
Quote:
"Q:
Why do I get the following errors:
general: errno2result.c:109: unexpected error:
general: unable to convert errno to isc_result: 14: Bad address
client: UDP client handler shutting down due to fatal receive error:
This is, of course, *not* what SRV records were intended for. In my experience,
most of these "proof of domain ownership" idiots will also offer TXT records as
an alternative.
Speaking of SRV misuse/misapplication, Microsoft's use of SRV records as a
generic domain-remapping mechanism for Excha
In article ,
"Lightner, Jeff" wrote:
> SRV definitely still required for some applications. Some cloud based
> application providers have you add them to verify you own the domain to which
> they're tying their services so you don't use them to hijack other people's
> domains.
I was talkin
SRV definitely still required for some applications. Some cloud based
application providers have you add them to verify you own the domain to which
they're tying their services so you don't use them to hijack other people's
domains.
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-boun...@lists.is
Hi Mukund
Its bind-9.8.2-0.23 and the OS is Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.0
(kernel- 2.6.32-431.17.1.el6.x86_64)
Sincerely Yours
---
Md. Mahbubul Alam Reyad
Assistant Manager
CORE-IP Network || Technology
Cell: +880 1976672281 || Sk
Hi Mahbubul
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 11:39:19AM +, Md. Mahbubul Alam Reyad wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Recently I am getting the following error in my DNS. Can anyone know the
> reason, impact & solution of this error?
>
> general: error: unable to convert errno to isc_result: 92: Protocol not
> av
Hi all
Recently I am getting the following error in my DNS. Can anyone know the
reason, impact & solution of this error?
general: error: unable to convert errno to isc_result: 92: Protocol not
available
general: error: socket.c:1700: unexpected error:
Sincerely Yours
-
13 matches
Mail list logo
