On Tuesday, 17. July 2007, Heiko Wundram (Beenic) wrote: > On Tuesday 17 July 2007 09:20:16 Michael Nottebrock wrote: > > Yes - and this: > > > > zone "." { > > type slave; > > file "slave/root.slave"; > > masters { > > 192.5.5.241; // F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. > > 192.228.79.201; // B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. > > 192.33.4.12; // C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. > > 192.112.36.4; // G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. > > 193.0.14.129; // K.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. > > }; > > notify no; > > }; > > > > prevents me from resolving hostnames in "my.domain". What I'm still > > wondering though, is this an oversight or by design? I can't imagine > > setups like mine are very rare. Doug? > > This is natural, unless you specifically enter the zones for 192.168.8.* > (forward and reverse) in your client DNS server (as slave or forward zones, > see the bind manual for the latter, which I'd recommend in your case).
Ah, I'm (re)-learning more about DNS here than I ever thought I would. Indeed, with forward and reverse slave zones, I don't need to comment out anything anymore from the default config. I guess that solves my problems and the list audience will be saved from yet more DNS talk. :) Cheers, -- ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | [EMAIL PROTECTED] (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.