Re: 2GB Memory Limits on Solaris 10

2009-06-09 Thread Mark Andrews
The default build is 32 bits. To perform a 64 bit build add the appropriate compiler specific flags to CFLAGS and ensure that all the relevent libraries are available in 64 bit form. e.g. ./configure CFLAGS="-m64 -g -02" Mark In m

Re: Trying to understand DNSSEC and BIND versions better

2009-06-09 Thread Adam Tkac
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:22:12AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote: > > In message <99e6a67a9da87041a8020fbc11f480b3031cc...@exvs01.dsw.net>, "Jeff > Lig > htner" writes: > > BIND versions on RHEL (e.g. 9.3.4-6.0.3.P1.el5_2) have backported > > patches from later BIND versions so it isn't exactly the s

Clients sometimes get wrong view

2009-06-09 Thread Corey Shaw
OS: Gentoo Bind Version: 9.6.0-p1 I currently have my Bind server set up with 3 views. It seems that every now and then I have clients in the "office" view that try to go to www.mydomain.com (which should be a public address), but instead they get the internal address that is defined in the

RE: Clients sometimes get wrong view

2009-06-09 Thread Jeff Lightner
It seems the mydomain.com isn't in the view but presumably in one of the includes. So the most likely issues seem to be: 1) You have defined mydomain.com in more than one of the includes which we can't tell since you didn't provide them. -OR- 2) The client actually has an unex

Re: Clients sometimes get wrong view

2009-06-09 Thread Kevin Darcy
Note that the newer versions of querylog format include not only the source address of the client, but also what view was *actually* matched by the query. It should be useful to turn on the querylog for troubleshooting this particular issue, if the volume of queries isn't so huge that you'd run

Re: Clients sometimes get wrong view

2009-06-09 Thread Corey Shaw
Thanks Kevin and Jeff for your answers. I will try adding logging so that I can see exactly what view is matched. Also, yes, mydomain.com is listed in the include files that I did not provide. It is listed in each of the different views. This is how it had to be set up, because Bind does no

Re: Trying to understand DNSSEC and BIND versions better

2009-06-09 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <20090609113700.ga6...@evileye.atkac.englab.brq.redhat.com>, Adam Tk ac writes: > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 11:22:12AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > > In message <99e6a67a9da87041a8020fbc11f480b3031cc...@exvs01.dsw.net>, "Jeff > Lig > > htner" writes: > > > BIND versions on RHEL (e.g