Oliver Henriot wrote:
>Dear list users,
>
>I have a bind 9.3 server on a centos 5.2 machine which logs huge (about
>12 errors every second) quantities of FORMERR messages while trying to
>resolve /IN records which look like this :
>
>Mar 25 08:44:24 myserver named[1124]: FORMERR resolving
>'a
Petteri Heinonen wrote:
>Ok, thanks for confirming my doubts. As a related issue, how is Bind
>supposed to be used in a domain where Windows Domain Controllers are
>used for Windows domain services, but Bind is used for DNS? I mean, in
>a Windows domain DDNS updates are used by both Domain Contro
I wrote:
>>
>> There have been lots of posts on Windows AD/BIND integration over the
>> years. Check the list archives. What I suggest is placing the six AD
>> zones
>>
>> DomainDNSZones.example.com
>> ForestDNSZones.example.com
>> _msdcs.example.com
>> _sites.example.com
>>
Aleksander Kamenik wrote:
>I'm trying to setup BIND named to be a slave a MS Windows 2008 server's
>AD domain.
>
>I set it up to be the slave and it works fine and I can resolv A records
>from the domain on the slave bind. However I can't resolve some SRV
>records like
>
>_ldap._tcp.dc._msdcs.
I am trying to understand "format error" messages like this one from
BIND 9.7.0-P1:
Apr 15 15:36:02 dnsserver.it.anl.gov named[8662]:
[ID 873579 daemon.notice] DNS format error
from 209.234.234.42#53 resolving markets.nytimes.wallst.com/
for client 164.54.214.14#13132
I did some timings with BIND 9.6.1-P3 and 9.7.0-P1 on two servers:
SunOS 5.9 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Blade-1500 (old hardware)
Ubuntu hardy x86_64 GNU/Linux (more modern hardware)
I had noticed long times for "rndc reload" to complete, and I wanted to
see if 9.6.1-P3 was diff
I wrote on April 16:
>I did some timings with BIND 9.6.1-P3 and 9.7.0-P1 on two servers:
>
> SunOS 5.9 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Blade-1500 (old hardware)
> Ubuntu hardy x86_64 GNU/Linux (more modern hardware)
>
>I had noticed long times for "rndc reload" to complete, and I wanted
One of our networking personnel is trying to access
ftp.cisco.com
and is unable to do so from Argonne. He has no problem from home,
(Comcast). The Comcast DNS servers are
68.87.72.134
68.87.77.134
and report that they are running "Nominum Vantio 4.2.1.0" (about which
I know ver
>sasa sasa wrote:
>
>Hi list,
>
>Is it ok to upgrade from 9.4.2 to 9.7.0-P2 directly?
>i mean i already have 9.4.2, i can install latest one with ./configure,
>make and make install, is there a problem with this steps?
>
>please note i already tried it and it worked fine on a cache-only DNS.
The
On 06/13/10 13:00, Merton Campbell Crockett wrote:
> Microsoft's nslookup is broken. What alternative applications that can
> be installed and used in a Windows XP environment that will continue to
> work in a Windows 7 environment after a decision is made to upgrade Windows?
In this discussion,
.
;; Received 137 bytes from 136.145.5.66#53(ns1.upr.edu) in 65 ms
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
Bus Error (core dumped)
titania% ls -al core
-rw--- 1 b19141 staff2448292 Jun 14 07:25 core
titania%
titania.it.anl.gov# /usr/afsws/local/bin/gdb bind/bin/dig
/ex
b19141> This morning on a Solaris 9 system, I issued these comands:
b19141> titania% dig cnnet.upr.edu
b19141> ; <<>> DiG 9.7.0-P1 <<>> cnnet.upr.edu
[...]
b19141> Bus Error (core dumped)
ebers...@isc.org (Paul Ebersman) replied:
>Tried to repro on u
I just tried the same command on a Solaris 10 system, also 9.7.0-P2:
andvari-dr# ./dig cnnet.upr.edu +trace
; <<>> DiG 9.7.0-P1 <<>> cnnet.upr.edu +trace
;; global options: +cmd
. 517599 IN NS e.root-servers.net.
. 517599 IN NS a.r
At Mon, 14 Jun 2010 09:06:50 -0500 (CDT),
b19...@anl.gov wrote:
>> This morning on a Solaris 9 system, I issued these comands:
JINMEI Tatuya / replied:
> I believe I found the cause of the bug. Please try the patch copied
> below.
I tested the patch on Solaris 9 and 10, and no core files
14 matches
Mail list logo
