Hello,
I have Bind-9.6.1 running on our university environment, have been using
dynamic update.
My question is, when other DNS query my named for a record, for example
test.example.com, but this record doesn't exist. How long time will the remote
DNS cache this nonexist record?
I found the p
Hello everyone,
i've stumbled into a question whether it is possible to configure BIND
in a way that it responds to DNS SRV requests with the priority flag
changed depending on the IP address of the requesting party.
For example,
there are two SRV records for _foobar._tcp. One points to 10.0.1.2 a
Lev Vanyan wrote:
i've stumbled into a question whether it is possible to configure BIND
in a way that it responds to DNS SRV requests with the priority flag
changed depending on the IP address of the requesting party.
For example,
there are two SRV records for _foobar._tcp. One points to 10.0.1
On Jul 20 2009, Tech W. wrote:
I have Bind-9.6.1 running on our university environment, have been
using dynamic update.
My question is, when other DNS query my named for a record, for example
test.example.com, but this record doesn't exist. How long time will the
remote DNS cache this nonexist
On Jul 20 2009, Dmitry Rybin wrote:
Lev Vanyan wrote:
i've stumbled into a question whether it is possible to configure BIND
in a way that it responds to DNS SRV requests with the priority flag
changed depending on the IP address of the requesting party.
For example,
there are two SRV records
20.07.09 14:11, Chris Thompson написав(ла):
> On Jul 20 2009, Dmitry Rybin wrote:
>
>> Lev Vanyan wrote:
>>>
>>> i've stumbled into a question whether it is possible to configure BIND
>>> in a way that it responds to DNS SRV requests with the priority flag
>>> changed depending on the IP address o
Hi,
I see exactly this problem too on windows 2003.
Lookups happen normally after this behaviour occurs though.
Restarting bind cures the problem.
I haven't bothered to debug the issue as yet :-)
Ian
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-boun..
Rather than applying lipstick to the pig, why not run a local
caching-only resolver? Move up and out of the stub-ville slums. A local
instance of named doesn't take up that much server resources (disk,
memory, CPU), and pays you back by *not*, as a stub resolver does, using
network resources, a
Ken Lai wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote:
99% of the time openDNS works by just pointing some agent to their ip
space.
That 1% of the time, openDNS tries to make DNS responses that are
modified in a way to try to help you.
Maybe this is your issue?
Googl.com being common enough they elect to retu
On Jul 15 2009, I wrote:
We had an incident last night on the authoritative nameserver which
is master for dnssec-test.csi.cam.ac.uk (a signed zone). At the time
it was running BIND 9.6.1rc1 (but I doubt if 9.6.1 is going to make
a difference). A script-generated update timed out, and it subsequ
Hi list,
I have some servers with bind 9.5.0.P2 and one with bind 9.6.1.
And the servers logs have a lot of messages with "after disabling EDNS"
as seen above:
[...]
Jul 20 15:31:34 server named[6909]: edns-disabled: info: success
resolving 'www.click21.com.br/A' (in 'www.click21.com.br'?) af
Lev Vanyan wrote:
20.07.09 14:11, Chris Thompson написав(ла):
On Jul 20 2009, Dmitry Rybin wrote:
Lev Vanyan wrote:
i've stumbled into a question whether it is possible to configure BIND
in a way that it responds to DNS SRV requests with the priority flag
changed depending on the IP address o
At Mon, 20 Jul 2009 16:13:03 +0100,
"Ian Tait" wrote:
> I see exactly this problem too on windows 2003.
> Lookups happen normally after this behaviour occurs though.
>
> Restarting bind cures the problem.
> I haven't bothered to debug the issue as yet :-)
We've found a bug that can cause this p
At Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:41:24 -0700,
JINMEI Tatuya wrote:
> We've found a bug that can cause this problem. We're working on a
> complete fix to the problem, but a workaround patch copied below may
> work for you in the mean time.
Sorry that patch was incorrect. Copying the correct one.
---
JIN
Jeremy,
Thanks for the replay, but I have ran into another issues. On the Slave server
I am getting this error when I set up like the that of the FAQ,
CHUCK PAYNE | Unix System Administrator
TRAVEL CHANNEL MEDIA
3700 Mansell Rd, Suite 500
Alpharetta, GA 30022
Office: 404-269-5533
Blackberry:
The problem with this approach is when you are running a couple thousand
servers - suddenly, you are running a couple thousand more instances of BIND
that need monitoring/patching/care/feeding.
A more clever resolver, or a simpler caching setup locally would be ideal.
Otherwise, you could redo
Todd Snyder wrote:
The problem with this approach is when you are running a couple thousand
servers - suddenly, you are running a couple thousand more instances of BIND
that need monitoring/patching/care/feeding.
A more clever resolver, or a simpler caching setup locally would be ideal.
What
You've got some invalid syntax. Elements in a "masters" clause are
separated by semicolons, not just whitespace. I don't believe you can
use negation in a "masters" clause either.
On the slave side, your main task is to ensure that your outgoing
zone-transfer requests are signed with the appro
In message <950.42549...@web15608.mail.cnb.yahoo.com>, "Tech W." writes:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have Bind-9.6.1 running on our university environment, have been using dyna
> mic update.
>
> My question is, when other DNS query my named for a record, for example test.
> example.com, but this record do
--- On Tue, 21/7/09, Mark Andrews wrote:
> From: Mark Andrews
> Subject: Re: about cache nonexist record
> To: "Tech W."
> Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org
> Received: Tuesday, 21 July, 2009, 8:01 AM
>
> In message <950.42549...@web15608.mail.cnb.yahoo.com>,
> "Tech W." writes:
> >
> > Hello,
In message <4a64c374.4000...@serpro.gov.br>, Breno Silveira Soares writes:
> Hi list,
>
> I have some servers with bind 9.5.0.P2 and one with bind 9.6.1.
> And the servers logs have a lot of messages with "after disabling EDNS"
> as seen above:
>
> [...]
> Jul 20 15:31:34 server named[6909]: ed
21 matches
Mail list logo