Re: NS also in SOA doesn't get NOTIFY

2011-10-27 Thread Jonathan Stewart
Ah ha! Now this was the option I was looking for. Tell bind to also notify the SOA MNAME server, since it's not the true master feeing the zones. Looks like this first appeared in BIND 9.5, and OpenBSD 4.9 still ships 9.4.2. :( Thanks for the tip, Chris, I didn't know such an option existed. C

Re: NS also in SOA doesn't get NOTIFY

2011-10-27 Thread Jonathan Stewart
You have a good point. That SOA MNAME is used in a very limited way, and is not involved in DNS resolution, which is what i'm concerned about. We are not using DDNS, so i could put any value in there. However, i have some desire to make my SOA 'clean', meaning not putting nonsense values in SOA

Re: NS also in SOA doesn't get NOTIFY

2011-10-27 Thread Chris Thompson
On Oct 27 2011, Kevin Darcy wrote: On 10/27/2011 11:02 AM, Jonathan Stewart wrote: Hello, Recently I set up a group of nameservers using a hidden master, visible slaves configuration. ns0 - hidden master ns1, ns2, ns3 - visible slave servers So I set the SOA and NS records like this zone.ex

Re: NS also in SOA doesn't get NOTIFY

2011-10-27 Thread Alan Clegg
On 10/27/2011 11:02 AM, Jonathan Stewart wrote: > Also, is this normal/expected behaviour? How can i get ns0 (and the > others) to NOTIFY ns1 when the serial is incremented? Must i use an > explicit {also-notify} ? Yes, this is expected. Since NS1 is the "master" server (since it is in the SOA

Re: NS also in SOA doesn't get NOTIFY

2011-10-27 Thread Kevin Darcy
On 10/27/2011 11:02 AM, Jonathan Stewart wrote: Hello, Recently I set up a group of nameservers using a hidden master, visible slaves configuration. ns0 - hidden master ns1, ns2, ns3 - visible slave servers So I set the SOA and NS records like this zone.example IN SOA ns1.zone.example. hostm