Is it really necessary to document everything that *isn't* true? That could
fill volumes...
named is the thing that resolves stuff; /etc/resolv.conf tells processes whom
to talk to if they want to resolve stuff. Put those things together, why would
named need /etc/resolv.conf? To talk to *itself*?
- Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: bind-users [mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of
Spumonti Spumonti
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2016 12:26 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: named and use of resolv.conf? - how to "learn" this
(I've done several searches for this first but the general nature of some of
these terms returned way too many non-relevant responses)
I was recently told that named does not use resolv.conf when resolving names.
This was not something I was aware of but at this point I accept that. The
system in question is an authoritative only server, no recursion enabled, that
for some zones it hosts, lists secondary name servers in other organizations
(in other words these name servers are in zones NOT hosted on this server)
My real question is: where is this documented? I've read DNS books and scoured
different sites but couldn't find anything stating this was how named behaved.
Maybe I just suck at searching for things or was using imprecise terms.
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
