Bob 
that did help, as it gave me a chance to evaluate my choice of deployment.
If I wasnt the ONLY *nix geek in the house, my boss would authorize DNS being
run on Linux or BSD.
BUT until I get my techs up to speed I have to run it on Win

ALAS

Anyway I picked BIND over native Win DNS so that what we all learn about BIN
will translate to *nix when the techs are ready to make the transistion..


Many thanks & Happy New Year!!!
-A

On 31 Dec 2002 08:38:07 -0700 Bob McGregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> 
> Austin I was running Bind 9.2.2 on NT and
> changed to the Linux version as =
> there is an issue with 9.2.2 that they are
> aware of that bind stops =
> responding on the UDP port for some reason. 
> There is no failure in Bind (=
> does not stop) and no event logs are produced.
> 
> here's a brief snippet from my conversation
> with Danny Mayer the guru on =
> NT Bind:
> 
> > >Are you running NT 4.0 or W2K? There is a
> problem in W2K which causes
> > >it to stop responding on a UDP socket. This
> is due to a Microsoft bug
> > >that they introduced in W2K in the protocol.
> There is a workaround for =
> it
> > >in SP2, but it also requires code changes to
> BIND, instead of their =
> just=20
> > fixing
> > >the underlying bug.  There is a fix for this
> in BIND 9.3.0.
> > >
> > >Danny
> > >
> >
> >thanks Danny,
> >
> >I'm running on 4.0 sp6.  Where do I get 9.3.0
> for NT?  Do you think it =
> will
> >fix my problem?
> 
> You can't. It's still under development. I
> don't know the timetable for=20
> release.
> It should fix your problem.
> 
> 
> Also, I'm not sure you want to solve it with
> DNS. Don't you want all =
> inbound mail to go through your IMgate and then
> get passed to IMail?
> 
> hope this helps... bob
> 
> On Tuesday, December 31, 2002 8:23 AM,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Good Morning IMGate List.
> >
> >This is Austin. Me & my number one gun, have
> swung the CEO on purchasing =
> us
> >IMail in leui (sp?) of Exchange. Len and Don
> offered some help on the =
> learning
> >curve, and we're grateful.
> >It doesnt look like it will be too bad.
> >
> >BUT
> >I just dl'd ISC Bind 9.2 for NT.
> >b/c we couldn't mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >instead we could only mail
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >I may be wrong but I told her we could fix
> this with a cname in BIND. Am =
> I
> >right/wrong?
> >I dont want end users mailing to the hosts
> FQDN, just the
> >domain name.
> >
> >Also if ANYONE has a smattering of DNS files
> for NT that I can look at =
> for
> >their domain, I'll FedEx them doughnuts.
> >
> >Was up past midnight last night, googling
> "bind" + "nt" +
> >"tutorial"
> >
> >May as well have been running it on Linux for
> what came back
> >Did fine until I started making the forward
> and reverse zones. Then down =
> in
> >flames. Anyone with working configs (not the
> core files the zone files) =
> that
> >they dont feel are a risk to share with me, I
> sure would love
> >you for it.
> >
> >Thanks
> >Probably best to mail me at work or my
> coworker
> >
> >Thanks to ALL, (I dont think this is RTFM)
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >Take Care & Happy New Year to all of you
> >-A
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 


Reply via email to