Maybe he has no say in what ISP is used, and they have draconian policies...
On Sat, 16 Sep 2017 19:48:51 +0200
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> . . .
> >Note:1.2.3.4 is not what they really return . I've changed it for
> >privacy .
>
> why? it's your ISP, there's no need to hide IP they send t
On 16.09.17 07:01, Omid Kosari via bind-users wrote:
2nd scenario is mine . Upstream manipulated everything on 53 tcp/udp . Even
if i query a non-existent dns-server it returns result ;)
Note:1.2.3.4 is not what they really return . I've changed it for privacy .
why? it's your ISP, there's n
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 10:50:14AM +, Alberto Colosi wrote:
> even on hotel . why not to use a BIND on unix or window
> on ur box u r using ?
>
> it is so easy
Ugh, this is a mailing list, please use real words and not TXT
messaging / chat abbreviations. Thank you.
No, it is not ea
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 03:18:57AM -0700,
Omid Kosari via bind-users wrote:
> This is my first post to this mailing list .
And it's a classic example of "XY question": "I want to do X, and I
think Y will do it, so I ask how to do Y, although people more
familiar with the subject matter think
On 16-09-2017 16.01, Omid Kosari via bind-users wrote:
> 2nd scenario is mine . Upstream manipulated everything on 53 tcp/udp . Even
> if i query a non-existent dns-server it returns result ;)
>
> C:\WINDOWS\system32>nslookup newsroom.fb.com 8.8.8.254
> Server: UnKnown
> Address: 8.8.8.254
>
>
2nd scenario is mine . Upstream manipulated everything on 53 tcp/udp . Even
if i query a non-existent dns-server it returns result ;)
C:\WINDOWS\system32>nslookup newsroom.fb.com 8.8.8.254
Server: UnKnown
Address: 8.8.8.254
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:newsroom.fb.com
Addresses: 1.2.3.4
Am 16.09.2017 um 15:12 schrieb Sten Carlsen:
On 16-09-2017 14.56, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 16.09.17 04:19, Omid Kosari via bind-users wrote:
Actually my situation is a bit strange . But as explanation i can say
that
our upstream provider do dns manipulation on normal ports 53 tcp/ud
On 16-09-2017 14.56, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 16.09.17 04:19, Omid Kosari via bind-users wrote:
>> Actually my situation is a bit strange . But as explanation i can say
>> that
>> our upstream provider do dns manipulation on normal ports 53 tcp/udp
>> (please
>> don't ask why). We may n
On 16.09.17 04:19, Omid Kosari via bind-users wrote:
Actually my situation is a bit strange . But as explanation i can say that
our upstream provider do dns manipulation on normal ports 53 tcp/udp (please
don't ask why). We may not use vpn or tunnels . The only way is using
alternate ports as for
I asked a technical question . Please answer technically if you know the
answer . Else your answer just take others time .
Thanks inn advance
--
Sent from: http://bind-users-forum.2342410.n4.nabble.com/
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/
-users on behalf of Omid Kosari
via bind-users
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2017 1:19 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Different forwarder for certain response ip (result ip )
Wow . I love active community .
Actually my situation is a bit strange . But as explanation i can say that
Am 16.09.2017 um 13:19 schrieb Omid Kosari via bind-users:
Wow . I love active community .
Actually my situation is a bit strange . But as explanation i can say that
our upstream provider do dns manipulation on normal ports 53 tcp/udp (please
don't ask why). We may not use vpn or tunnels . The
Wow . I love active community .
Actually my situation is a bit strange . But as explanation i can say that
our upstream provider do dns manipulation on normal ports 53 tcp/udp (please
don't ask why). We may not use vpn or tunnels . The only way is using
alternate ports as forwarders.
But i can no
behalf of
Reindl Harald
*Sent:* Saturday, September 16, 2017 12:46 PM
*To:* bind-users@lists.isc.org
*Subject:* Re: Different forwarder for certain response ip (result ip )
Am 16.09.2017 um 12:32 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
1. who runs DNS servers on port 443?
likely people which where
certain response ip (result ip )
Am 16.09.2017 um 12:32 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
> 1. who runs DNS servers on port 443?
likely people which where bitten by hotel access points where 53 is
catched to a internal nameserver and outgoing only 80/443 are possible,
the same reason many peo
tor & CED Handling ..
From: bind-users on behalf of Omid Kosari
via bind-users
Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2017 12:18 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Different forwarder for certain response ip (result ip )
Hello,
This is my first post to this mailing list .
I have a cachin
Am 16.09.2017 um 12:32 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
1. who runs DNS servers on port 443?
likely people which where bitten by hotel access points where 53 is
catched to a internal nameserver and outgoing only 80/443 are possible,
the same reason many people have a VPN server on 443
_
On 16.09.17 03:18, Omid Kosari via bind-users wrote:
I have a caching bind dns server with forwarders like this .
forwarders {
8.8.8.8;
8.8.4.4;
};
why do you use forwarders? You rarely need that - not when you have acess to
the nameservers on internet.
BIND can do very well without
Hello,
This is my first post to this mailing list .
I have a caching bind dns server with forwarders like this .
forwarders {
8.8.8.8;
8.8.4.4;
};
I want to use another forwarders if the response of the query is for example
1.2.3.4
I've found that rpz-ip is what i want but i was
19 matches
Mail list logo
