Guess I should start digging in the code then :) On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Evan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > IIRC update-policy cannot be used in congestion with the allow-update > > statement. > > My bad--you're right. There's code I'd never noticed before that says > allow-update will be ignored if update-policy is set. Whoops. > > (Oddly, the check only applies when both of them are defined in the > zone itself. You can put "allow-updates" in the view options and > "update-policy" in the zone, and named won't complain about it... > but it also won't work the way you want it to.) > > I don't know why it was implemented this way--there's no protocol reason > I can see. (There may be other reasons I don't know about.) It's probably > not a high enough priority for ISC to devote engineering resources to it at > this time, but if someone submitted a patch that added an ACL check to the > update-policy syntax, I'm sure we'd consider it. > > -- > Evan Hunt -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. >
_______________________________________________ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
