Dear Team,
My BIND DNS Server is crashing again and again.
I am getting these logs:
Jul 2 12:03:33 gaurav named[30523]: query.c:5379: INSIST(!is_zone) failed,
back trace
Jul 2 12:03:33 gaurav named[30523]: #0 0x805a7a5 in assertion_failed()+0x45
Jul 2 12:03:33 gaurav named[30523]:
Dear Team,
My BIND DNS Server is crashing again and again.
I am getting these logs:
Jul 2 12:03:33 gaurav named[30523]: query.c:5379: INSIST(!is_zone) failed,
back trace
Jul 2 12:03:33 gaurav named[30523]: #0 0x805a7a5 in assertion_failed()+0x45
Jul 2 12:03:33 gaurav named[30523
Marc Lampo wrote:
>
> you are aware that Windows DNS service understands DNSSEC algorithm 5
> (RSA/SHA-1 – NSEC) at most ?
Carsten Strotmann's post says Windows Server 2012 fixes this limitation
http://strotmann.de/roller/dnsworkshop/entry/dnssec_validation_in_microsoft_dns
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n
On 7/1/2012 2:42 PM, J P wrote:
Hello all!
I understand RFC compliant DNS servers use AXFR and IXFR for synching
bewteen masters and slaves... and that this is the general scenario
for that purpose.
However, I need somebody to technically explain to me why cant I use a
DNS resolver daemon s
I may have missed something but has this been patched in a 9.8.x version
of BIND? According to the 9.9.0 release notes this has been addressed
but just wondering about the availability for other vulnerable versions.
Also, is there a known trigger?
The reason I'm running is that we're current
I can't answer for RedHat, but this bug fix was included in BIND 9.8.2.
3284. [bug] Address race conditions with the handling of
rbtnode.deadlink. [RT #27738]
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 05:40:51PM -0500, Oscar Ricardo Silva wrote:
> I may have missed something but
I *THINK* I found the reason for why we're exposed to this bug ... It
would appear that Redhat based their BIND package on 9.8.2rc1. Guess
where the patch for this bug was applied? 9.8.2rc2.
Oscar
On 07/02/2012 05:47 PM, Evan Hunt wrote:
I can't answer for RedHat, but this bug fix was in
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 07:16:40PM -0500, Oscar Ricardo Silva wrote:
> I *THINK* I found the reason for why we're exposed to this bug ... It
> would appear that Redhat based their BIND package on 9.8.2rc1. Guess
> where the patch for this bug was applied? 9.8.2rc2.
Sigh. It wouldn't be the fi
8 matches
Mail list logo