I wrote:
> I don't understand why named would try to use these ports in the first
> place as they appear in avoid-v4-udp-ports.
Mark Andrews replied:
The "::" in the log message is the IPv6 equivalent of 0.0.0.0 in IPv4.
You machine *is* dual stacked even i
named is trying to use ports I've mentioned in =
> avoid-v4-udp-ports.
> >>=20
> >> Platform: BIND 9.8.1-P1 on Solaris 10 / SPARC
> >>=20
> >> On some of the ports which BIND might otherwise choose to use,=20
> >> I have other daemons running and/or the
On Nov 17, 2011, at 6:28 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <20171600.pahg0ucw011...@scramble.princeton.edu>, Irwin
> Tillman writes:
>> It appears that named is trying to use ports I've mentioned in
>> avoid-v4-udp-ports.
>>
>> Platform: BIND 9.8.
In message <20171600.pahg0ucw011...@scramble.princeton.edu>, Irwin Tillman
writes:
> It appears that named is trying to use ports I've mentioned in
> avoid-v4-udp-ports.
>
> Platform: BIND 9.8.1-P1 on Solaris 10 / SPARC
>
> On some of the ports which BIND
It appears that named is trying to use ports I've mentioned in
avoid-v4-udp-ports.
Platform: BIND 9.8.1-P1 on Solaris 10 / SPARC
On some of the ports which BIND might otherwise choose to use,
I have other daemons running and/or the OS treats the ports
as privileged. To keep named from t
In message <20090622143213.2ea6417...@britaine.cis.anl.gov>, bsfin...@anl.gov w
rites:
> I am running 9.6.0-P1, and I added to my BIND options statement:
>
> avoid-v4-udp-ports { range 20030 20777;};
>
> When I did an "rndc config" I saw this message:
>
I am running 9.6.0-P1, and I added to my BIND options statement:
avoid-v4-udp-ports { range 20030 20777;};
When I did an "rndc config" I saw this message:
using default UDP/IPv4 port range: [1024, 65535]
in /var/adm/messages. Is BIND doing what I wanted (e.g., use UDP
7 matches
Mail list logo
