Hi Andrew,
On 9/04/2011 12:37 a.m., andrew wales wrote:
>
> Remember that rndc dumpdb doesn't actually dump the cache to stdout.
> Has it actually written to named_dump.db in named's working directory?
> Regards,
>
> Andrew
Thanks - you are spot on here :-) I was expecting the DB to be writte
On 8 April 2011 12:00, Patrick Rynhart wrote:
> (where the host 192.168.239.2 is "upstream" DNS in my case), then DNS
> queries are resolved by the client but do not appear to be cached, i.e.:
>
> # rndc dumpdb
> #
>
> What am I missing ?
>
Remember that rndc dumpdb doesn't actually dump the cac
Dnia 2011-04-08 23:00 Patrick Rynhart napisał(a):
>On 8/04/2011 10:11 p.m., Tony Finch wrote:
>
>> No, only DNS requests that are handled by the server itself are cached.
>> There is no sniffing going on.
>>
>> Tony.
>
>Thank you for the clarification. If I add "nameserver 127.0.0.1" to the
>V
Dnia 2011-04-08 21:58 Patrick Rynhart napisał(a):
>I am new to using BIND and thought that I would start by setting up a
>caching-only name server on a VM running CentOS 5.5. While in this
>mode, my understanding is that named should be passively listening for
>any DNS requests that are resolve
On 8/04/2011 10:11 p.m., Tony Finch wrote:
> No, only DNS requests that are handled by the server itself are cached.
> There is no sniffing going on.
>
> Tony.
Thank you for the clarification. If I add "nameserver 127.0.0.1" to the
VM (and comment out the existing name servers) and attempt to r
Patrick Rynhart wrote:
> I am new to using BIND and thought that I would start by setting up a
> caching-only name server on a VM running CentOS 5.5. While in this
> mode, my understanding is that named should be passively listening for
> any DNS requests that are resolved and be adding them to
6 matches
Mail list logo
