Re: multiple internal views not working (requested conf files

2009-11-02 Thread Kevin Darcy
Alan Clegg wrote: Kevin Darcy wrote: Views are matched in order, so "!10.x.5.0/24;" is redundant -- anything in that range would have been matched by the previous view. But, but by explicitly putting it there, the ordering of the views is no-longer important. "Better safe than sorry". If I

Re: multiple internal views not working (requested conf files

2009-11-02 Thread Alan Clegg
Kevin Darcy wrote: Views are matched in order, so "!10.x.5.0/24;" is redundant -- anything in that range would have been matched by the previous view. But, but by explicitly putting it there, the ordering of the views is no-longer important. "Better safe than sorry". AlanC

Re: multiple internal views not working (requested conf files

2009-11-02 Thread Kevin Darcy
Krash, Paul wrote: Kevin Darcy asked: Confused. Looks like the clients are matching the correct view, but "fckd.net" is not defined in either view, so what exactly was the point of having views? fckd.net names are going to get resolved the same regardless. I attempted to obfuscate ou

Re: multiple internal views not working (requested conf files

2009-11-02 Thread Krash, Paul
Kevin Darcy asked: >Confused. Looks like the clients are matching the >correct view, but "fckd.net" is not defined in either view, > so what exactly was the point of having views? fckd.net names are >going to get resolved the same regardless. I attempted to obfuscate our internal domain name, Mr

Re: multiple internal views not working (requested conf files and logs)

2009-11-02 Thread Paul Krash
Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > > Do you have anything to match here? By default, match-clients and > match-destinations default to matching all addresses (even not > "internal"). So when you reversed, the other view (dot5) would never > match and wouldn't work. > Hey Mr. Reed! Would this statement be e

Re: multiple internal views not working (requested conf files and logs)

2009-11-02 Thread Kevin Darcy
Confused. Looks like the clients are matching the correct view, but "fckd.net" is not defined in either view, so what exactly was the point of having views? fckd.net names are going to get resolved the same regardless. - Kevin Paul Krash wrote: Jeremy C. Reed wrote: It may be useful for you

Re: multiple internal views not working (requested conf files and logs)

2009-11-02 Thread Jeremy C. Reed
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009, Paul Krash wrote: > > view internal { > > > > zone "eng.exegy.net" { Do you have anything to match here? By default, match-clients and match-destinations default to matching all addresses (even not "internal"). So when you reversed, the other view (dot5) would never

Re: multiple internal views not working (requested conf files and logs)

2009-11-02 Thread Paul Krash
Jeremy C. Reed wrote: It may be useful for you to show us what you tried (configurations and that it is restarted), how you tested, and any network traces and log files showing that it is not working. All, the 'dot5' view works great. The 'internal' view does not serve. If I reverse the view or