I'm looking for methods to reduce the period of time we cache external
records (e.g., www.google.com). I think the option I need to implement
is max-cache-ttl.
Is this the correct method for limiting caching? Are there reasons that
I should or should not do it?
Thanks,
Brian
On 9/23/2010 10:19 AM, Atkins, Brian (GD/VA-NSOC) wrote:
I'm looking for methods to reduce the period of time we cache external
records (e.g., www.google.com). I think the option I need to implement
is max-cache-ttl.
Is this the correct method for limiting caching? Are there reasons that
I shoul
Two reasons. First, we assume authoritive control for two to three
domains each quarter. Limiting the caching TTL would make changes easier
to make when we don't have the cooperation of the hosting provider(s).
Second, we use BIND to blackhole records/domains. Limiting the TTL would
make the chang
Hi!
I hope this is the right alley for my question. I run a public DNS for
several domains on a gentoo server. After upgrading to 9.7.1_p2 I read in
the shipped configuration that "All zone blocks for "public" view should be
listed here in "internal" too!".
Now, what does it mean? Do I simply cop
In views order is important. If you have internal before others (e.g.
external) then that is the default view.
What I *think* it is telling you is that if you have an internal view that you
restrict to certain networks that you need to insure you have all the public
zones in the external
Hi!
Thanks for the answer :) Well, this is web-server, there is no such thing as
an internal user or network, let alone 127.0.0.1 (which is definitely in
"internal" only). Since the shipped configuration files is accepting queries
from:
acl "trusted" {
127.0.0.0/8;
::1/128;
};
I'd say is made fo
On AIX, I'm used to /etc/dns. CentOS seems to place in /var/named. Is there
any blessed, bestofallpossibleworlds place for the zone files. I'm moving our
DNS from from AIX to CentOS/Fedora. I'm inclined to create the /etc/dns dir but
maybe it'd be better to put it in /var/named.Comments
On 09/23/10 12:53, Stewart Dean wrote:
On AIX, I'm used to /etc/dns. CentOS seems to place in /var/named. Is
there any blessed, bestofallpossibleworlds place for the zone files. I'm
moving our DNS from from AIX to CentOS/Fedora. I'm inclined to create
the /etc/dns dir but maybe it'd be better t
/etc = named.conf, rndc.conf and other config files
/var/named = zone files.
Are you running just bind or bind-chroot. If the latter then named.conf
goes in /var/named/chroot/etc rather than /etc and the zone files go
into /var/named/chroot/var/named instead of /var/named.
You can configure thin
On 23.09.10 20:32, Bèrto ëd Sèra wrote:
> Thanks for the answer :) Well, this is web-server, there is no such thing as
> an internal user or network, let alone 127.0.0.1 (which is definitely in
> "internal" only).
why do you use views then? I guess there's no need for it...
--
Matus UHLAR - fan
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 15:53:26 -0400, Stewart Dean wrote:
> On AIX, I'm used to /etc/dns. CentOS seems to place in /var/named. Is
> there
> any blessed, bestofallpossibleworlds place for the zone files. I'm
moving
> our
> DNS from from AIX to CentOS/Fedora. I'm inclined to create the /etc/dns
they (the distro maintainers) could not agree to put anything in the same place
if the worlds sanity depended on it.
/var/named
/srv/bind
/etc/bind
/var/lib/named
/usr/local/named
it's all over the place. myself i just create links from /var/named (which is
where I think it was found on most
>
> Hi!
>
> why do you use views then? I guess there's no need for it...
>
Because I usually tend to modify a proposed configuration as little as
possible, as long as it doesn't cause trouble. But it looks like this one is
quite far from what a web-server needs.
Bèrto
__
> > why do you use views then? I guess there's no need for it...
On 23.09.10 23:13, Bèrto ëd Sèra wrote:
> Because I usually tend to modify a proposed configuration as little as
> possible, as long as it doesn't cause trouble. But it looks like this one is
> quite far from what a web-server needs.
On 09/23/10 13:14, Greg Whynott wrote:
they (the distro maintainers) could not agree to put anything in the
same place if the worlds sanity depended on it.
/var/named /srv/bind /etc/bind /var/lib/named /usr/local/named
it's all over the place. myself i just create links from /var/named
(which
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010, Michael Sinatra wrote:
On 09/23/10 12:53, Stewart Dean wrote:
On AIX, I'm used to /etc/dns. CentOS seems to place in /var/named. Is
there any blessed, bestofallpossibleworlds place for the zone files. I'm
moving our DNS from from AIX to CentOS/Fedora. I'm inclined to crea
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010, Paul Wouters wrote:
> Note that RHEL/CentOS/Fedora rely on SElinux instead of chroot(). The
problem
> with chroot() is needing copies of system files, which make it hard to
package
> for updates, etc. But the same applies, for SElinux policies to work
properly,
> stick with th
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010, Jason Mitchell wrote:
[...@clueby4.net ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release
CentOS release 5.5 (Final)
[...@clueby4.net ~]$ yum info bind-chroot
Name : bind-chroot
That's only there as legacy though, to not break updating old systems
that depend on it. The recommended meth
Yesterday Bind has crashed with the following error:
# grep segfault messages
Sep 23 20:21:10 ns kernel: [5079807.029465] named[19531]: segfault at
dededf1e ip 0813d4d7 sp b618f320 error 5 in named[8048000+1c9000]
Is it possible to determine the cause of this failure?
# uname -a
Linux ns 2.6.
19 matches
Mail list logo
