rity", "network", "default", "config", "queries" and "update".
How can we enable the journal files in our case? Is there any impact on the
DNS performance?
Regards
Daniel
-Original Message-
From: Tony Finch [mailto:d...@dotat.at]
Sen
Hello
Is it possible to enable the audit logs on BIND DNS so we can track changes
performed on the DNS records level (Add/Delete/Modify A,MX,NS,. records)?
Regards
Daniel
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
Hello
We are getting "Unspecified error" when querying our DNS server (Query:
outlook.live.com) from a PC communication with our DNS
We tried to perform the same query from the DNS itself (local host) and we
found that the Dig output is showing with the following message "Truncated,
retry
ind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Resolving issue on specific domain
On 15.07.16 12:05, Daniel Dawalibi wrote:
>To: 'Matus UHLAR - fantomas' ,
>bind-users@lists.isc.org
please avoid personal replies. use list-reply whenever possible.
>I already did it as per below output of reso
UHLAR - fantomas
Sent: 15 July, 2016 11:58 AM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Resolving issue on specific domain
On 12.07.16 17:13, Daniel Dawalibi wrote:
>We are facing a weird issue while resolving a specific domain name from
>our authoritative DNS server running on BIND 9.1
Hello
We are facing a weird issue while resolving a specific domain name from our
authoritative DNS server running on BIND 9.10.4-P1
Server has only one public IP address.
If you try to resolve the domain using either dig or nslookup you will not
get any result whereas if you specify @localho
n.com': already in use
On 16/06/2016 07:53, Daniel Dawalibi wrote:
> We are upgrading our DNS authoritative BIND version 9.10.4-P1 but we
> are facing "writing errors" on the slave zone files that are
> transferred from other Master DNS servers.
>
> Our configuration cons
Hello
We are upgrading our DNS authoritative BIND version 9.10.4-P1 but we are
facing "writing errors" on the slave zone files that are transferred from
other Master DNS servers.
Our configuration consists of two views (local and inter) and the domain is
configured in both views sections.
Hello
Is there any tool or configuration that allows us to monitor/graph the
number of outbound DNS queries toward the Root servers?
As you can see in the below examples the first query answered by M root then
F root in the second query.
; <<>> DiG 9.7.0-P1 <<>> www.cnn.com +trace
;; glob
Hello Barry
DNS registrar that can offer this option by using apex/naked/root domain
redirection
Regards
Daniel
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Barry Margolin
Sent: 27 April, 2016 5:23 PM
To: comp-protocol
Hello John
The below is not working on our BIND version BIND 9.10.0-P2 unless it is
working on other version
Domain.com. CNAME x.y.com.
www CNAME x.y.com.
Errors returned when adding these records:
general: dns_master_load: ourweddingaccount.com.db.inter:13:
ourweddingaccount.com: CNAME
Hello
We are facing a resolving problem on BIND DNS when adding a CNAME RR for
root domain and other records.
Do you have any work around since it is not feasible as per the following
article http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1034.html RFC1034 section 3.6.2?
Example:
Domain.com CNAME x.y.c
Do you think it is better to remove it from named.root?
Is there any impact on the DNS resolving ?
Regards
Daniel
-Original Message-
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer [mailto:bortzme...@nic.fr]
Sent: 14 April, 2016 10:35 AM
To: Daniel Stirnimann
Cc: Daniel Dawalibi; bind-us...@isc.org
Subject
Hello
Anyone experiencing a reach ability issue toward g.root-servers.net?
# dig @g.root-servers.net ns
; <<>> DiG 9.7.0-P1 <<>> @g.root-servers.net ns
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
# dig @192.112.36.4 ns
; <<>
Hello
We observed an unusual traffic combining ICMP and UDP packets while running
the tcpdump command on the DNS caching server
Kindly note that only UDP DNS traffic is allowed on this server (ICMP is not
allowed from outside to DNS server)
Any help regarding this issue? Why we are getting I
: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: reject invalid dns queries
On 19.01.15 16:14, Daniel Dawalibi wrote:
>Invalid DNS queries : non-existent domains that do not resolve to any
>IP as mentioned in the below example.
you should better not use this definition.
>We are trying to protec
(DNS IP)
19-Jan-2015 15:46:08.100 queries: client IP#49791 (invaliddnsqueries.com): view
zones: query: invaliddnsqueries.com IN A + (DNS IP)
Regards
Daniel
-Original Message-
From: Warren Kumari [mailto:war...@kumari.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 11:31 PM
To: Daniel Dawalibi
Hello,
Is there any solution to drop the invalid DNS queries from the BIND
configuration?
Regards
Daniel
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-users mailing list
bind-us
ig +trace
;; Received 493 bytes from 192.5.5.241#53(f.root-servers.net) in 64 ms
dig: couldn't get address for 'k.gtld-servers.net': failure
Regards
Daniel Dawalibi
Senior Systems Engineer
e-mail:daniel.dawal...@idm.net.lb
Jisr Al Bacha P.O. Box 11-316 Beirut Lebanon
tel +961 1 512
192.36.148.17
i.root-servers.net. 604765 IN 2001:7fe::53
;; Query time: 2 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Wed Feb 19 16:38:34 2014
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 512
Best Regards,
Daniel Dawalibi
-Original Message-
From: Niall O'Reilly [mailto:niall.orei
Hello
We are facing an intermittent resolving problems on several domains. While
debugging the issue we found the below failures
Can you please help?
Kindly note that the number of recursive clients is increasing during the
problem : recursive clients: 3700/14900/15000
1- dig: coul
om: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:27 PM
To: Daniel Dawalibi
Cc: 'Thomas Schulz'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: BIND 9.5.0-P2 DNS issue
At Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:29:05 +0200,
Daniel Dawalibi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> T
ed as beta, you
might try 9.5.1b3. It fixes a bug in the cache cleaning and increases
the default max-cache-size. As far as I can tell, it is not less stable
than 9.5.0-P2.
>On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:26:37 +0200
>Daniel Dawalibi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
23 matches
Mail list logo