> >> I wonder, what are expected usages for this kinds of zones?
> >> Maybe blacklists, if we have local mirrors and traffic so high that
> >> we'd get blocked imediately?
> On Jan 24, 2011, at 5:59 AM, Cathy Almond wrote:
> > One use case is for testing new servers that aren't yet part of the mai
On Jan 24, 2011, at 5:59 AM, Cathy Almond wrote:
>> I wonder, what are expected usages for this kinds of zones?
>> Maybe blacklists, if we have local mirrors and traffic so high that we'd get
>> blocked imediately?
>
> It's subtle.
>
> One use case is for testing new servers that aren't yet par
On 24.01.2011 15:54, Paul Wouters wrote:
> I meant, if you have a zone example.tld. And tld. is not signed, but
> you have a testbed for a signed tld. at IP 1.2.3.4, if static-stub
> would allow you to configure a resolving bind to perform DNSSEC on
> 1.2.3.4 with a loaded trusted-key. So yes, the
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
Does this work with DNSSEC if one loads an explicit trust anchor, even
if in the "world view" the trust anchor is missing?
I'm afraid I don't understand the question. Could you be more
specific, e.g., by using the above example.com example?
I
> so, iiuc, the difference is that "type forward" sends queries with RD bit
> set, while "type static-stub" sends them with RD cleared... and
> the "forward first" option appears to be applicable only in forward zones.
>
> did I get it right?
Yes
>
> I use forward zones for blacklists - while I
> > On 21.01.11 10:45, Sue Graves wrote:
> >> * BIND now supports a new zone type, static-stub. This allows the
> >> administrator of a recursive nameserver to force queries for a
> >> particular zone to go to IP addresses of the administrator's choosing,
> >> on a per zone basis, both globally
On 24/01/11 10:56, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> On 21.01.11 10:45, Sue Graves wrote:
>> * BIND now supports a new zone type, static-stub. This allows the
>> administrator of a recursive nameserver to force queries for a
>> particular zone to go to IP addresses of the administrator's choosing
On 21.01.11 10:45, Sue Graves wrote:
> * BIND now supports a new zone type, static-stub. This allows the
> administrator of a recursive nameserver to force queries for a
> particular zone to go to IP addresses of the administrator's choosing,
> on a per zone basis, both globally or per view. I.
At Sat, 22 Jan 2011 20:38:46 +0100,
Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> Does this work with DNSSEC if one loads an explicit trust anchor, even
> >> if in the "world view" the trust anchor is missing?
> >
> > I'm afraid I don't understand the question. Could you be more
> > specific, e.g., by using the ab
* JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉:
> Paul Wouters wrote:
>> Does this work with DNSSEC if one loads an explicit trust anchor, even
>> if in the "world view" the trust anchor is missing?
>
> I'm afraid I don't understand the question. Could you be more
> specific, e.g., by using the above example.com examp
At Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:00:19 -0500 (EST),
Paul Wouters wrote:
> >* BIND now supports a new zone type, static-stub. This allows the
> > administrator of a recursive nameserver to force queries for a
> > particular zone to go to IP addresses of the administrator's choosing,
> > on a per zone ba
Sue Graves writes:
New Features
9.8.0
* BIND now supports a new zone type, static-stub. This allows the
administrator of a recursive nameserver to force queries for a
particular zone to go to IP addresses of the administrator's choosing,
on a per zone basis, both globally or per view. I.e. i
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Sue Graves wrote:
* BIND now supports a new zone type, static-stub. This allows the
administrator of a recursive nameserver to force queries for a
particular zone to go to IP addresses of the administrator's choosing,
on a per zone basis, both globally or per view. I.e. i
13 matches
Mail list logo
