On 01/05/2016 01:03 PM, Emmett Culley wrote:
> I am seeing these lines for each domain in the systemd journal:
>
> zone relationship123.com/IN: loading from master file relationship123.com.db
> failed: file not found
> zone relationship123.com/IN: not loaded due to errors.
> _default/relationship123.com./IN: file not found
>
>
> If I change the zone defs to include the full path:
>
> From
>
> zone "relationships123.com." IN {
> type master;
> file "relationships123.com.db";
> };
>
> To
>
> zone "relationships123.com." IN {
> type master;
> file "/var/named/chroot/var/named/relationships123.com.db";
> };
>
> in the config file, named starts, but then fails to provide DNS replies with
> the following error for each request:
>
> general: error: zone relationships123.com/IN: loading from master file
> /var/named/chroot/var/named/relationships123.com.db failed: file not found
> general: error: zone relationships123.com/IN: not loaded due to errors.
>
> Nothing was changed in the named configuration prior to updating to 7.2
>
> As usual I am using systemctl start named-chroot to start the server.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Emmett
I was able to get named to start and resolve DNS requests by creating two
named.conf files. One in /etc/named.conf, that contains zone file definitions
that included the absolute path to the zone file, like this:
zone "relationships123.com." IN {
type master;
file "/var/named/chroot/var/named/relationships123.com.db";
};
And another in /var/named/chroot/etc/named.conf that contains zone file
definitions with only the zone file name (no path). Like this:
zone "relationships123.com." IN {
type master;
file "relationships123.com.db";
};
None of this makes sense to me as the previous configuration (that worked
before upgrade to 7.2) used symbolic links in /etc to the files in
/var/named/chroot/etc. While trying to figure this out I found, from the
documentation, that if the named.conf file does not exist in the chroot
structure, a copy of the file in /etc is "copied" to be used by the running
chrooted server.
Now, after updating to bind 9.9.4-29.el7_2.1 (CentOS 7.2) from bind
9.9.4-29.el7 (CentOS 7.1, latest) I have to use two separate files to get bind
to initialize and run.
Any ideas why I seem to be the only one seeing this?
Emmett
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
