On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk> wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas >> <uh...@fantomas.sk> wrote: >>> >>> What's the SOA? It's possible that the zones were not expired, so they >>> were >>> provided as saved on disk. Since BIND wasn't able to transfer newer >>> versions, it continued providing old versions. > > > On 26.03.15 12:48, Frank Even wrote: >> >> Yes, the old versions were provided on disk on initial load. But that >> was then followed up with a SUCCESSFUL zone transfer minutes later, >> but the server was unable to save the tmp file in the working >> directory and served stale content until about 2 hours later when the >> server was able to get another successful zone transfer from the >> master and then loaded the new zone in memory (despite being unable to >> write the tmp file to update the local copy of the zone). > > > what didthe logs say? > Looks like the first transfer wasn't really successful (or the zone was > rejected)
Logs indicated successful transfer, permission denied writing the tmp-xxxxx file that happens prior to writing it out to the zone file itself. _______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
