Thanks Bob, that is exactly what I ended up doing. And its working great
now. You are also right about the view selection.
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Bob Harold wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 6:25 PM, project722 wrote:
>
>> Actually, I got to thinking about this. The "other_allowed_ns
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 6:25 PM, project722 wrote:
> Actually, I got to thinking about this. The "other_allowed_ns" ACL is in
> the global options, along with an "allow-transfer" for that ACL. So, I
> *think* they will still be able to zone transfer via the global option
> based on simply IP. BUT
>A very popular option is to only create or delegate IPv6 PTR entries for
>hosts with static address assignments, and to return NXDOMAIN for
>address space used for dynamic address assignments.
I talk to a lot of large providers at M3AAWG and that's the consensus
about what to do. If it doesn't h
Tom wrote:
> This is the configuration-option, where I'm searching for. But probably this
> will take some time, until it's accepted, tested, implemented...etc. What do
> you propose in the meantime instead of using wildcards or allow the clients
> to register themselves or making static PTR-entrie
On 26.08.16 07:34, Tom Tom wrote:
I'm searching a way to respond to IPv6-PTR-Queries like the
"$GENERATE"-mechanism for IPv4 has done it.
On 26 August 2016 at 13:45, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
why? configuring single IP addresses or taking them from DHCP is easier
than creating new useles
On 26 August 2016 at 15:41, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
>
>>> On 26.08.16 14:01, Matthew Pounsett wrote:
>
>> That's not necessarily true for IPv6, where even a modest network could
>> have trillions of addresses that may need PTR records.
>>
>
> that's exactly why using $GENERATE and/or creati
On 26 August 2016 at 13:45, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> On 26.08.16 07:34, Tom Tom wrote:
>
>> I'm searching a way to respond to IPv6-PTR-Queries like the
>> "$GENERATE"-mechanism for IPv4 has done it.
>>
>
> why? configuring single IP addresses or taking them from DHCP is easier
> than
> cre
On 26.08.16 07:34, Tom Tom wrote:
I'm searching a way to respond to IPv6-PTR-Queries like the
"$GENERATE"-mechanism for IPv4 has done it.
why? configuring single IP addresses or taking them from DHCP is easier than
creating new useless mechanism.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ;
In article ,
Harshith Mulky wrote:
> Thank you John, Mukund, Barry and Dave for your insights and answers on this
> Topic.
>
>
> @Dave, Lets say we have a Web Page cached(when queried by User 1) and the
> webpage has either moved the Link ( accessing the same Link from a different
> user wo
Hello Tom
I only know of Knot having a feature available for this use case:
https://www.knot-dns.cz/docs/2.x/html/configuration.html#synth-record-automatic-forward-reverse-records
Daniel
On 26.08.16 11:51, Tom wrote:
> Many thanks for your quick feedback.
>
> This is the configuration-option,
Many thanks for your quick feedback.
This is the configuration-option, where I'm searching for. But probably
this will take some time, until it's accepted, tested,
implemented...etc. What do you propose in the meantime instead of using
wildcards or allow the clients to register themselves or m
I've noticed a spike of ServFail responses on our caching resolvers due
to some DNSSEC issues on time.nist.gov (CNAME to ntp1.glb.nist.gov). If
anyone of you guys has a direct contact would you be so kind and notify
them...
http://dnsviz.net/d/time.nist.gov/dnssec/
--
BR, Rok
> Hi list
>
> I'm searching a way to respond to IPv6-PTR-Queries like the "$GENERATE"
> -mechanism for IPv4 has done it.
>
> I read about Delegation, self-registration with "tcp-self" or using
> Wildcards with the disadvantage, that every query has the same response.
> Is there a (planned) way, to
13 matches
Mail list logo
