On 01/09/2018 05:11 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
Tom wrote:
Slip is set to "0" (always drop). After stopping the flood, I'm immediately
able to query the same record (www.example.com) with a positive answer. Does
the "window 5;" or "window 30;" or "window 3600;" possibly has no effect?
The script
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Oscar Ricardo Silva wrote:
I currently run 9.9.9-P4 on recursive caching servers and with the
announcement that 9.9 and 9.10 are approaching end of maintenance, I've
decided it's time to move to 9.11.
Are there any issues, warnings, concerns in upgrading? Changes that need
I currently run 9.9.9-P4 on recursive caching servers and with the
announcement that 9.9 and 9.10 are approaching end of maintenance, I've
decided it's time to move to 9.11.
Are there any issues, warnings, concerns in upgrading? Changes that need
to be made to named.conf? I know there are new
Bob Harold wrote:
>That's a good test, with the default window of 15 seconds, but could you
> please repeat it with a window like 120, and see if it changes
> accordingly?
With a window of 5 I got a recovery time of 6s.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finchhttp://dotat.at/ - I xn--zr8h punycode
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 11:11 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> Tom wrote:
> >
> > Slip is set to "0" (always drop). After stopping the flood, I'm
> immediately
> > able to query the same record (www.example.com) with a positive answer.
> Does
> > the "window 5;" or "window 30;" or "window 3600;" possibly
Tom wrote:
>
> Slip is set to "0" (always drop). After stopping the flood, I'm immediately
> able to query the same record (www.example.com) with a positive answer. Does
> the "window 5;" or "window 30;" or "window 3600;" possibly has no effect?
The script below works for me. My server is configu
On 01/09/2018 02:49 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
Tom wrote:
If I set the "responses-per-second 5;" and the "window 30;", then begin
flooding (the responses are correctly dropped), then stop flooding, then
querying the nameserver from the same source for the same RR, I'll get
immediately the right a
Neil wrote:
>
> would be very valuable for IPv6 PTR record creations without using the
> memory consuming $GENERATE directive.
There's no need for blanket IPv6 reverse DNS.
Only set up reverse DNS for your statically allocated v6 addresses. Leave
everything else with no reverse DNS, or you can u
Tom wrote:
>
> If I set the "responses-per-second 5;" and the "window 30;", then begin
> flooding (the responses are correctly dropped), then stop flooding, then
> querying the nameserver from the same source for the same RR, I'll get
> immediately the right answer.
>
> Any explanations for this b
9 matches
Mail list logo
