On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 07:45:41AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Known issue triggering a number of insist failures in rbt.c.
> Please roll back to 9.10.3-P4 while we prepare a new release.
Note that the probable fix is already in our public git repository.
https://source.isc.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cg
Known issue triggering a number of insist failures in rbt.c.
Please roll back to 9.10.3-P4 while we prepare a new release.
In message <573b903f.9000...@electricembers.coop>, Benjamin Connelly writes:
> We are seeing occasional crashes after updating to 9.10.4 on FreeBSD 10.1.
>
>
> May 17 09:46
We are seeing occasional crashes after updating to 9.10.4 on FreeBSD 10.1.
May 17 09:46:07 smtp1 named[74136]: general: critical: rbt.c:2576:
INSIST(delete)->is_root == 1) ? isc_boolean_true :
isc_boolean_false) && *rootp == delete) || (! (((delete)->is_root == 1)
? isc_boolean_true : isc
"managed-keys" is not a config option, try moving it outside the option
stanza, eg
options {
version ""; // remove this to allow version queries
listen-on{ 127.0.0.1; 192.168.21.101; };
listen-on-v6 { none; };
empty-zones-enable yes;
allow-query
Hi all,
I have a problem with DNSSEC and I dont find a solution. Maybe someone can help
me.
My intention is to run a bind which acts as DNSSEC enabled resolver for my
internal LAN. This runs on a VirtualBox instance with OpenBSD 5.9. I got a
precompiled package from OpenBSD, version is 9.10.3-
Okay, yeah I am running DHCP on the same server so I'll check its settings.
Thanks!
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Matthew Pounsett
wrote:
>
>
> On 16 May 2016 at 19:03, Josh Nielsen wrote:
>
>> Thank you for the response Mark. I'm still a little confused at what this
>> might mean though. C
On 17 May 2016 at 09:29, Woodworth, John R
wrote:
> >
> > > >Ideally every machine should be registering its own PTR record in the
> > > >DNS and addresses without machines shouldn't have PTR records.
> > > >The only reason ISP did this is that they were too lazy to manage PTR
> > > >records for
>
> > >Ideally every machine should be registering its own PTR record in the
> > >DNS and addresses without machines shouldn't have PTR records.
> > >The only reason ISP did this is that they were too lazy to manage PTR
> > >records for their customers.
> >
> > And because no ISP wants "you.suck.is
In message
, Josh
Nielsen writes:
I have a message that has been showing up in my master DNS server's log
over the past few weeks and I am wondering if I can find more verbose
specifics from debugging messages in BIND somehow.
The messsage looks like this:
May 16 10:52:16 dns01 named[2591]: 1
9 matches
Mail list logo
