Re: BIND 9.16.1 failing assertion

> Yup, that borked our entire environment today. Shame on my for not testing > in non-prod first :( > > Fell back to 9.14 on FreeBSD for now. > Note that the libuv issue was seen (and fixed) on FreeBSD -CURRENT recently: . I'm not aware o

Re: BIND 9.16.1 failing assertion

Thanks, downgrading libuv to libuv 1.35.0-1 resolved the issue -- Sent from: http://bind-users-forum.2342410.n4.nabble.com/ ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list b

Question About Recursion In A Split Horizon Setup

We have split horizon setup and enable our internal and trusted hosts to do things as follows: allow-recursion { trustedhosts; }; allow-transfer { trustedhosts; }; 'trustedhosts' includes a number of public facing IPs as well as the 192.168.0/24 CIDR block. It also includes the IPs of t

Re: BIND 9.16.1 failing assertion

On 4/16/20 5:03 PM, arlac77 wrote: > Hello, > i am using > > BIND 9.16.1 (Stable Release) > > on > > Linux odroid1 4.14.173-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Mar 22 14:06:09 UTC 2020 > armv7l GNU/Linux > > > after a few seconds of operation bind dumps with: > > 16-Apr-2020 23:39:01.633 netmgr.c:1000

Re: BIND 9.16.1 failing assertion

This appears to libuv version related. We have had a couple of reports in the last couple of days. Roll back one version of libuv until we manage to isolate the issue. > On 17 Apr 2020, at 08:03, arlac77 wrote: > > Hello, > i am using > > BIND 9.16.1 (Stable Release) > > on > > Linux odroi

BIND 9.16.1 failing assertion

Hello, i am using BIND 9.16.1 (Stable Release) on Linux odroid1 4.14.173-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Mar 22 14:06:09 UTC 2020 armv7l GNU/Linux after a few seconds of operation bind dumps with: 16-Apr-2020 23:39:01.633 netmgr.c:1000: REQUIRE(worker->recvbuf_inuse) failed 16-Apr-2020 23:39:01.63

Re: Try to figure a basic conf for BIND on Mac Catalina

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:53 AM David Chandler wrote: > > I have been working on this for days. Anything other than Caching-only > configuration will not register anything. Port 53 will not open. It is unclear what you are meaning by "Port 53 will not open" - is BIND binding to the port? Does it

Re: BIND9 DoT/DoH - request for comments

Witold Kręcicki wrote: > I'm currently working on DoH/DoT design - most specifically, the configuration > syntax that will be used to set up DoH/DoT. Since removing or modifying > options in named.conf is very hard I want it to be done properly - hence this > request for comments. The current des

VS: 9.16.2 / DNSSEC / DS records

Thanks! -Alkuperäinen viesti- Lähettäjä: Mark Andrews Lähetetty: 16. huhtikuuta 2020 2:30 Vastaanottaja: Jukka Pakkanen Kopio: bind-us...@isc.org Aihe: Re: 9.16.2 / DNSSEC / DS records > On 16 Apr 2020, at 09:21, Jukka Pakkanen wrote: > > Updating from 9.14.11 to 9.16.2, and migrat