Debugging "configuring TKEY: failure" (w/samba4)

I'm attempting to get Bind 9.7.2 (built on openSUSE 11.3) running in relation to Samba4; this uses GSSAPI authentication to update the Bind zones. Everything works except this part. I've build bind with --with-gssapi, verified krb5 is linked in, and verified [at least with kinit and other trivial

Re: error (broken trust chain) resolving

Casey Deccio deccio.net> writes: > > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Brian J. Murrell interlinx.bc.ca> wrote: > > $ dig @linux -p 1053 41.70.55.206.sa-trusted.bondedsender.org txt Doh! I forgot the +dnssec. > What happens when you run the following queries: > > dig +dnssec @linux -p 1053 or

why one shouldn't use relative hostnames

We are working with a software vendor whose software only works with relative hostnames - they say it can't cope with a fully-qualified domain name. They want us to make sure the necessary domain is in all clients' search lists. Does anyone have any good references for me to explanations of why

BIND 10 Operational Requirements Survey: Help shape the future of BIND

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dear User Community - BIND 10 is now in its second year of development, and we would like to hear more from current BIND 9 users about operational needs for BIND 10 as we move toward the more user-facing aspects of BIND 10 development. This survey wi

BIND View Option

Hi all, we are in a situation here in our company that is: we need to send a internal IP address in a answer of a query when the source is a specific IP. So we created a new view and put the source address of this IP and configured the internal zone file on this view and this is working well. B

"forward after" option

Hi all, we have a situation on our company today that is: We have a external authoritative zone in our public DNS. Have have a partner company that connect to our network and need to use a internal IP address of our company but using the internal link and the

Re: BIND View Option

> >Is there a way or option to configure bind to do the following logic: If the >bind didn’t find a entry in a view 1 (internal view) it will search this >entry on the view 2 (external view) ? Not to my knowledge. We had the same problem and ended up with using the hosts file for the special IP

Re: BIND View Option

From: St?phanas Schaden wrote: >Is there a way or option to configure bind to do the following logic: >If the bind didn't find a entry in a view 1 (internal view) it will >search this entry on the view 2 (external view) ? Place the common piece in a separate include file: view "view1" { ...

RES: BIND View Option

Hi Barry, I'm sorry but I didn't understand the configuration. Could you give me an example of the named.conf.non-views ? Thank you. Stéphanas Schaden stephan...@ctbc.com.br Uberlândia - MG - Brazil -Mensagem original- De: bind-users-bounces+stephanass=ctbc.com...@lists.isc.org

Re: BIND View Option

On 11/10/2010 3:17 PM, J. Thomsen wrote: Is there a way or option to configure bind to do the following logic: If the bind didn’t find a entry in a view 1 (internal view) it will search this entry on the view 2 (external view) ? Not to my knowledge. We had the same problem and ended up with usin

Re: "forward after" option

What you're suggesting is not really the "inverse" of "forward first". "Forward first" is basically: (try forwarding) -> [TIMEOUT FROM ALL FORWARDERS] -> (try iterative resolution) The inverse would be: (try iterative resolution) -> [TIMEOUT FROM ALL AUTHORITATIVE NAMESERVERS] -> (try forwardin

Re: BIND View Option

>Not sure why you felt it necessary to resort to hosts files. Well, I don't know how to configure ressource records in an include file and don't want to waste gigabytes of RAM duplicating zones. > What am I missing here? The idea of avoiding front ends ! >"View"s in BIND was never meant to

Re: why one shouldn't use relative hostnames

On 11/10/2010 1:19 PM, Maria Iano wrote: We are working with a software vendor whose software only works with relative hostnames - they say it can't cope with a fully-qualified domain name. They want us to make sure the necessary domain is in all clients' search lists. Does anyone have any goo

Re: no. of Views and Zones

Alans, I think you're mixing up the resolver function with the hosting function. With some development and implementation, you can offer your customers the ability to set up and maintain their own domains on one nameserver instance, and then have another instance set up for them to

Re: BIND View Option

In article , Stéphanas Schaden wrote: > Hi all, > > > > we are in a situation here in our company that is: we need to send a > internal IP address in a answer of a query when the source is a specific IP. > So we created a new view and put the source address of this IP and > configured the in

Re: BIND View Option

On 11/10/2010 7:23 PM, J. Thomsen wrote: Not sure why you felt it necessary to resort to hosts files. Well, I don't know how to configure ressource records in an include file and don't want to waste gigabytes of RAM duplicating zones. If your main concern is resource consumption, maybe you sh

Could DNS help solve this?

Hi This is not a bind problem, not really a DNS problem. I still hope that these might be able to help provide the solution. With the growing number of registrars of e.g. .com domains, it becomes difficult or even almost impossible to figure out which whois server you should ask for information a

Re: Could DNS help solve this?

Hi Sten, >With the growing number of registrars of e.g. .com domains, it becomes >difficult or even almost impossible to figure out which whois server you >should ask for information about a domain name. Use Whois (first under the 'Other software:' heading) from the command prompt.