Re: checking subnet delegation?

> Hi All: I have a /28 that was supposed to be delegated to my NS by my > ISP. > > How can I check that it is correctly delegated? I have the in-addr.arpa > zone > configured in my NS and it resolves properly when I test it locally, but > if > I test using a remote service no reverse is found. > >

Re: checking subnet delegation?

> Hi All: I have a /28 that was supposed to be delegated to my NS by my > ISP. > > How can I check that it is correctly delegated? I have the in-addr.arpa > zone > configured in my NS and it resolves properly when I test it locally, but > if > I test using a remote service no reverse is found.

OT: checking subnet delegation?

Hi All: I have a /28 that was supposed to be delegated to my NS by my ISP. How can I check that it is correctly delegated? I have the in-addr.arpa zone configured in my NS and it resolves properly when I test it locally, but if I test using a remote service no reverse is found. The subnet is 21

Re: Propagation of my NS records?

Hi All: I think this is a little OT, but I'm wondering why changes to my NS records aren't propagating when my NS is authoritative for my domain? enigmedia.com is registered at NetSol and delegated to my NS: ns.enigmedia.com (running on bind9/fedora) ns1.enigmedia.com (running on bind9/Freebsd

OT: Propagation of my NS records?

Hi All: I think this is a little OT, but I’m wondering why changes to my NS records aren’t propagating when my NS is authoritative for my domain? enigmedia.com is registered at NetSol and delegated to my NS: ns.enigmedia.com (running on bind9/fedora) ns1.enigmedia.com (running on bind9/Freebsd)

Re: multiple slave zones pointing to same file?

The slave files do not carry the "@" I presume you are using on the master -- the zone-transfer data includes the specific domain names -- so the slave files can't be shared even if they could be shared. Maybe you can write a program that translates the slave data into the sharable format, and ev

Re: rndc.key vs. rndc.conf

| Hi All: One more conf issue on bind 9.7.1-P2 | After running rndc-confgen and reloading BIND I?m getting this error: | WARNING: key file (/etc/namedb/rndc.key) exists, but using default | configuration file (/etc/namedb/rndc.conf) | rndc: connection to remote host closed | This may indicate that

Re: multiple slave zones pointing to same file?

IME the best way to do this on a Unix'y system is to use hard links. That way if you ever need to change one of them to be its own file it's trivial to do so. Also IME, BIND doesn't react well to having multiple slave zones sharing the same file, but that may have improved in more recent versions,

9.7.1-P2 managed-keys error

02-Oct-2010 17:33:53.125 general: error: managed-keys-zone ./IN: loading from master file managed-keys.bind failed: file not found I've googled around but am not clear on what's causing this error? Does this file need to be created manually for BIND to be able to write to it? I have a directo

rndc.key vs. rndc.conf

Hi All: One more conf issue on bind 9.7.1-P2 After running rndc-confgen and reloading BIND I’m getting this error: WARNING: key file (/etc/namedb/rndc.key) exists, but using default configuration file (/etc/namedb/rndc.conf) rndc: connection to remote host closed This may indicate that * the rem

Re: multiple slave zones pointing to same file?

On 10/2/2010 11:16 AM, online-reg wrote: > Hi All: I’m building a new Bind 9.7.1-P2 slave server and am taking an > opportunity to review my conf files. > > I have a number of zones on the primary that all point to the same zone > configuration file. On my slave server, is t

multiple slave zones pointing to same file?

Hi All: I’m building a new Bind 9.7.1-P2 slave server and am taking an opportunity to review my conf files. I have a number of zones on the primary that all point to the same zone configuration file. On my slave server, is there any way to configure named.conf so that multiple zones are all “a

TTLs on A records?

Hi All: I'm running Bind 9.5.0-P1 / Fedora on my primary NS. Are TTLs on individual A records universally supported? I have a domain with a TTL of "3h", and I wanted to route traffic between two servers in that domain quickly, so I set the TTL to the A record like: www300A123.123

"too many timeouts" "disabling EDNS"

Hi All: I'm seeing a lot of this: too many timeouts resolving '10.141.202.89.sbl.spamhaus.org/TXT' (in 'sbl.spamhaus.org'?): disabling EDNS with various IPs, repeating endlessly in my 9.6.0 log. Is this a configuration issue on my end? Or is it some sort of temporary failure on spamhaus's en

will blocking getting hammered by cache request do anything?

Hi All: my 9.6.0 server is getting hammered by cache requests from a specific IP (62.109.4.89) which traces back to what looks like a DSL netblock in Russia: 05-Mar-2009 12:18:01.883 queries: info: client 62.109.4.89#53157: query: . IN NS + 05-Mar-2009 12:18:01.883 security: info: client 62.10

how to clear resolver cache?

Hi All: Bind 9.5.0-p1 on Fedora...how do I clear the cache? I updated a FUBAR MX record at godaddy.com's NS, with a TTL of 3600. My local BIND seems to be caching the record after I updated at godaddy. When I query the upstream NS that the local server uses, it returns the updated MX record,