Some IPs were continuely attacked my DNS systems.
Saw from the log, lots of requests from those IPs to query for the
non-exist records in the cache.
Is there a way to prevent this instead of just blocking IP with
iptables? I'm running the latest BIND 9.7. thanks.
Regards.
--
Jeff Pang
www.DNSbe
On 25 May 2011, at 07:47, Jeff Pang wrote:
> Some IPs were continuely attacked my DNS systems.
> Saw from the log, lots of requests from those IPs to query for the
> non-exist records in the cache.
> Is there a way to prevent this instead of just blocking IP with
> iptables? I'm running the lates
2011/5/25 Niall O'Reilly :
>
>
> Which of your DNS systems: resolvers or authoritative?
>
> Where is the source of the attack: within your (or your
> customers') networks, or out on the Internet?
>
Thanks. My nameservers are authoritative server only.
--
Jeff Pang
www.DNSbe
You can blacklist things in named.conf but we've found it more efficient to
simply have iptables drop packets from the offending IPs so they never even get
to BIND.
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water..
On 2011-05-24 21:58, Warren Kumari wrote:
On May 24, 2011, at 1:55 PM, Igor da Silva Cagnin wrote:
I have a doubt about querys, as fact I’d like to deny just querys type MX.
Other querys types must be available. Is it possible?
Yes.
1: Don't list the MX record in your zone.
or
2: Have mul
Yes. I verified this with our chief network engineer this morning.
Yesterday on doing dig @ns1.google.com (or @ns2 or @ns3 or @ns4) my
results for the master were always the same IPs indicated in my initial
post for the master whereas those from my slave were always the ones
indicated in that sa
Yes.
The two servers are in separate logical /29s in our 10.x network but
both physically route through the same devices and get NATted to the
12.44.84.21x addresses shown below. So far as I know there is nothing
in the query that would let target servers know about our internal
network - that i
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Eivind Olsen wrote:
> Timothy Stoddard wrote:
>
> > Has any one run into a issue with two named processes running on the same
> > host. We want to begin serving up DNS on our IPv6 address space and do
> > not
> > want to duplicate each of our DNS servers. We hav
Your nitpick is warrantless - it should have been obvious from context
that I was speaking of the general purpose of these name servers from
our perspective - not implying they were somehow authoritative for
recursive queries.If it makes you feel better I'll call them my
"pedantic" and "irrelev
On 5/25/2011 9:21 AM, Niobos wrote:
On 2011-05-24 21:58, Warren Kumari wrote:
On May 24, 2011, at 1:55 PM, Igor da Silva Cagnin wrote:
I have a doubt about querys, as fact I’d like to deny just querys
type MX. Other querys types must be available. Is it possible?
Yes.
1: Don't list the MX r
On May 25 2011, Kevin Darcy wrote:
On 5/25/2011 9:21 AM, Niobos wrote:
[...]
No, that would return NODATA. The original poster was looking for a
"deny", which I interpret as REFUSED.
I think that's a pretty narrow interpretation of "deny".
Definition #2 of "deny" from dictionary.com reads
11 matches
Mail list logo
