> trying to resolve www.microsoft.com or microsoft.com results in a
> "connection timed out; no servers could be reached"
Well, for what it's worth - it's not just you having that issue. When
testing from home and from work I get the same.
Of course, I could be doing something wrong, but whenever
>> trying to resolve www.microsoft.com or microsoft.com results in a
>> "connection timed out; no servers could be reached"
>
> Well, for what it's worth - it's not just you having that issue. When
> testing from home and from work I get the same.
>
works fine for me on linux and Solaris.
--
> works fine for me on linux and Solaris.
In my case it's using FreeBSD and Solaris.
The problem might be related to where you do queries from?
Anyway, I tried some other nameservers / "looking glass" sites, like these
- I can't vouch for how good they normally are, but these were ones I
found w
It's working fine for me from RHEL5 Linux DNS servers and from Windows
DNS servers.
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org] On Behalf
Of Eivind Olsen
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 4:16
On 12/23/2010 4:09 PM, Casey Deccio wrote:
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Oisin McGuinness wrote:
But I can't find any reference to current PGP or other signing keys; does
anyone know where to find
them on the www.isc.org web site or where to obtain them otherwise?
http://www.isc.org/abou
On 12/24/2010 2:51 AM, Sunil Shetye wrote:
Here, I can see that the nameserver is giving the right replies to all
queries except the NS queries.
How can an authoritative server give "wrong" answers?
I was hoping that either bind should catch such cases automatically or
allow some workaround
On 12/28/10 00:26, Eivind Olsen wrote:
So, to recap: at the risk of showing what a fool I am by doing something
completely wrong here, I'm betting Microsoft has messed up their DNS - I
would have expected queries over TCP to work, and I would not have
expected EDNS to give a FORMERR (but ok, if
On 12/28/10 06:07, Lightner, Jeff wrote:
It's working fine for me from RHEL5 Linux DNS servers and from Windows
DNS servers.
It's not clear from this thread whether 'dig any microsoft.com
@ns[12345].msft.net' works for anyone. I cannot get it to work from any
of the msft.net servers on clien
Michael Sinatra wrote:
> On 12/28/10 06:07, Lightner, Jeff wrote:
>> It's working fine for me from RHEL5 Linux DNS servers and from Windows
>> DNS servers.
>
> It's not clear from this thread whether 'dig any microsoft.com
> @ns[12345].msft.net' works for anyone. I cannot get it to work from
> any
> On 12/23/2010 4:09 PM, Casey Deccio wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Oisin McGuinness
> > wrote:
> >
> >> But I can't find any reference to current PGP or other signing keys; does
> >> anyone know where to find
> >> them on the www.isc.org web site or where to obtain them otherwise?
At Tue, 28 Dec 2010 15:50:23 -0500 (EST), Thomas Schulz wrote:
>
> It looks like I am a little dim today. Given gpg and the key, what steps
> do I do to verify a source package?
General case:
$ gpg --verify sigfile tarball
Eg:
$ gpg --verify bind-9.7.2-P3.tar.gz.sha256.asc bind-9.7.2-P3.tar.gz
sorry for the top box on alan clegg
Le lundi 27 décembre 2010 à 08:48 -0500, Alan Clegg a écrit :
> On 12/27/2010 1:07 AM, fakessh wrote:
>
> > good day and merry christmas.
>
> Thanks, and to you as well.
>
> > I just put in place guidelines in bind config to update the signatures
> > dnssec
>
Thomas Schulz pisze:
>> On 12/23/2010 4:09 PM, Casey Deccio wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Oisin McGuinness
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
But I can't find any reference to current PGP or other signing keys; does
anyone know where to find
them on the www.isc.org we
Dnia 2010-12-28 09:26 Eivind Olsen napisał(a):
>> >> trying to resolve www.microsoft.com or microsoft.com results in a
>> >> "connection timed out; no servers could be reached"
>>
> >
> >Well, for what it's worth - it's not just you having that issue. When
> >testing from home and from work
fakessh @ pisze:
>>> zone "fakessh.eu" {
>>> type master;
>>> file "/var/named/fakessh.eu.hosts";
>>> auto-dnssec maintain;
>>> update-policy local;
>>> key-directory "/var/named/keyset-fakessh.eu";
>>> allow-transfer { 213.251.188.140;87.98.164.164;
Ok, trying to send the same email third time, maybe it will get to the right
recipient and with the right subject at last.
Damn webmail, damn trying to resend from thunderbird.
Dnia 2010-12-28 09:26 Eivind Olsen napisał(a):
>> >> trying to resolve www.microsoft.com or microsoft.com results in
>
> At Tue, 28 Dec 2010 15:50:23 -0500 (EST), Thomas Schulz wrote:
> >
> > It looks like I am a little dim today. Given gpg and the key, what steps
> > do I do to verify a source package?
>
> General case:
>
> $ gpg --verify sigfile tarball
>
> Eg:
>
> $ gpg --verify bind-9.7.2-P3.tar.gz.sha2
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Thomas Schulz wrote:
>>
>> At Tue, 28 Dec 2010 15:50:23 -0500 (EST), Thomas Schulz wrote:
>> >
>> > It looks like I am a little dim today. Given gpg and the key, what steps
>> > do I do to verify a source package?
>>
>> General case:
>>
>> $ gpg --verify sigfile ta
I'm using Bind9 for my name server (SERVER EXT) and to give name resolution for
who access from Internet to my domain (e.g. to access to my Web site or to
write to my email addresses).
My domain is example.com:
www.Example.com
test.h...@example.com
This dns server maps only my pubblic addresse
I'm using Bind9 for my name server (SERVER EXT) and to give name resolution
for who access from Internet to my domain (e.g. to access to my Web site or
to write to my email addresses).
My domain is example.com:
www.Example.com
test.h...@example.com
This dns server maps only my pubblic addresse
Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 16:42 -0500, Alan Clegg a écrit :
> On 12/28/2010 4:12 PM, fakessh @ wrote:
> > named-sdb[24511]: /var/named/renelacroute.fr.hosts.jnl: create:
> > permission denied
>
> Permissions are wrong on /var/named -- the named process needs to be
> able to write into it.
>
>
On 12/28/2010 5:04 PM, fakessh @ wrote:
>>> Dec 28 22:04:02 r13151 named-sdb[24511]: dns_dnssec_findzonekeys2:
>>> error reading private key file fakessh.eu/DSA/9552: file not found
>>
>> It seems that the .key and .private files are not in the right place.
> what is the right place ?
In your na
Quoting from David Sparro's mail on Tue, Dec 28, 2010:
> >Here, I can see that the nameserver is giving the right replies to all
> >queries except the NS queries.
>
> How can an authoritative server give "wrong" answers?
Due to misconfiguration of the NS records. My guess is that the domain
was t
23 matches
Mail list logo
