On Wed, 12 Dec 2012, Paula Bailey wrote:
> I have a zone file in a view and there seems to be a single entry in the
> file that shows and nxdomain when queried.
>
> I have confirmed the view is correct and other entries are resolvable. I
> have also run named-checkconf which shows no errors. Th
I have a zone file in a view and there seems to be a single entry in the
file that shows and nxdomain when queried.
I have confirmed the view is correct and other entries are resolvable. I
have also run named-checkconf which shows no errors. There are also no
errors in the logs.
Any ideas?
Pau
2012/11/9 Peter Andreev :
> 2012/11/9 Tony Finch :
>> Peter Andreev wrote:
>>>
>>> We signed another zone and met the same problem again. The only
>>> difference is algorithm - now it is RSASHA256.
>>>
>>> > We have ~30 servers running BIND (9.8, 9.7, 9.6). A week ago we
>>> > signed first of our
2012/11/9 Tony Finch :
> Peter Andreev wrote:
>>
>> We signed another zone and met the same problem again. The only
>> difference is algorithm - now it is RSASHA256.
>>
>> > We have ~30 servers running BIND (9.8, 9.7, 9.6). A week ago we
>> > signed first of our zones with RSA/SHA1 + NSEC3 + OPT-O
Peter Andreev wrote:
>
> We signed another zone and met the same problem again. The only
> difference is algorithm - now it is RSASHA256.
>
> > We have ~30 servers running BIND (9.8, 9.7, 9.6). A week ago we
> > signed first of our zones with RSA/SHA1 + NSEC3 + OPT-OUT.
> > Recently we realised th
Hi everybody!
We signed another zone and met the same problem again. The only
difference is algorithm - now it is RSASHA256.
> We have ~30 servers running BIND (9.8, 9.7, 9.6). A week ago we
> signed first of our zones with RSA/SHA1 + NSEC3 + OPT-OUT.
> Recently we realised that our servers don't
On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 13:59 +0400, Peter Andreev wrote:
> Hello!
>
> We have ~30 servers running BIND (9.8, 9.7, 9.6). A week ago we have
> signed first of our zones with RSA/SHA1 + NSEC3 + OPT-OUT.
> Recently we realised that our servers don't generate NSEC3 for signed zone.
> Problem has gone af
Hello!
We have ~30 servers running BIND (9.8, 9.7, 9.6). A week ago we have
signed first of our zones with RSA/SHA1 + NSEC3 + OPT-OUT.
Recently we realised that our servers don't generate NSEC3 for signed zone.
Problem has gone after we restarted BIND instances.
Is described behaviour normal for
In message <20100220192646.gb14...@fantomas.sk>, Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes:
> > Marco Davids (SIDN) wrote:
> >
> > > Anyone any clue? I am trying to understand why some resolvers handle
> > > this query well, while BIND 9.7.x returns a SERVFAIL.
>
> On 19.02.10 13:21, Alan Clegg wrote:
> > a
> Marco Davids (SIDN) wrote:
>
> > Anyone any clue? I am trying to understand why some resolvers handle
> > this query well, while BIND 9.7.x returns a SERVFAIL.
On 19.02.10 13:21, Alan Clegg wrote:
> acl...@yellow:~$ dig +short airfrance.fr ns
> webaf1.airfrance.fr.
> lasvegas.airfrance.fr.
> pr
Marco Davids (SIDN) wrote:
> Anyone any clue? I am trying to understand why some resolvers handle
> this query well, while BIND 9.7.x returns a SERVFAIL.
acl...@yellow:~$ dig +short airfrance.fr ns
webaf1.airfrance.fr.
lasvegas.airfrance.fr.
proof.rain.fr.
acl...@yellow:~$ dig +short @webaf1.air
Hi,
I run into an unclear situation while trying to resolve certain domains.
It happened when I tried with 9.7.0rc1, 9.7.0b and also with 9.7.0. I
dont's have a whole lot of other BIND versions at my disposal, but I
found an older one, 9.3.4-P1.2, and that one works fine.
One of the domains that
12 matches
Mail list logo
