ipv6 AAAA register and ipv4 NS register with the same name
Hello, We have bind 9.8.4. P2 with many registers delegated to Link load balancer (we have two public ip´s range and linkproof acts as a dns balancer). Now we need to add the ipv6 register for all those registers that are in ipv4 delegated to the link balancer but this balancer doesn´t support ipv6. So we have the ipv4 register as NS and the same register in ipv6 as .I thought that when i ask for the ipv4 register the link balancer should show the two public ip´s and when i ask for the register, the dns shows the ipv6 ip, but is not like this.Doesn´t matter i ask for ipv4(ns) or ipv6(), always obtent the ipv4 ip delegated to the link balancer. Is there any way to achieve the ipv6 register, despite the same regiter is created in ipv4 and delegated to the load balancer,resolves the record type? Please excuse my limited English. Regards ___ 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
Re: ipv6 AAAA register and ipv4 NS register with the same name
In article mailman.1278.1418632708.26362.bind-us...@lists.isc.org, Manuel RamÃrez manuel.rami...@grupoica.com wrote: Hello, We have bind 9.8.4. P2 with many registers delegated to Link load balancer (we have two public ip´s range and linkproof acts as a dns balancer). Now we need to add the ipv6 register for all those registers that are in ipv4 delegated to the link balancer but this balancer doesn´t support ipv6. So we have the ipv4 register as NS and the same register in ipv6 as .I thought that when i ask for the ipv4 register the link balancer should show the two public ip´s and when i ask for the register, the dns shows the ipv6 ip, but is not like this.Doesn´t matter i ask for ipv4(ns) or ipv6(), always obtent the ipv4 ip delegated to the link balancer. is the IPv6 version of A records, which translate names to addresses. Nameservers are listed in NS records, regardless of the IP version. Just use more nameserver records: @ IN NS v4-ns1 IN NS v4-ns2 IN NS v6-ns1 IN NS v6-ns1 v4-ns1 IN A 1.2.3.4 v4-ns2 IN A 9.8.7.6 v6-ns1 IN 11:22:33:44::1 v6-ns2 IN aa:bb:cc:dd::10 -- Barry Margolin Arlington, MA ___ 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
Re: ipv6 AAAA register and ipv4 NS register with the same name
On Dec 15, 2014, at 12:38 AM, Manuel Ramírez manuel.rami...@grupoica.com wrote: Hello, We have bind 9.8.4. P2 with many registers delegated to Link load balancer (we have two public ip´s range and linkproof acts as a dns balancer). Now we need to add the ipv6 register for all those registers that are in ipv4 delegated to the link balancer but this balancer doesn´t support ipv6. So we have the ipv4 register as NS and the same register in ipv6 as .I thought that when i ask for the ipv4 register the link balancer should show the two public ip´s and when i ask for the register, the dns shows the ipv6 ip, but is not like this.Doesn´t matter i ask for ipv4(ns) or ipv6(), always obtent the ipv4 ip delegated to the link balancer. Is there any way to achieve the ipv6 register, despite the same regiter is created in ipv4 and delegated to the load balancer,resolves the record type? It's not entirely clear what you're trying to do, but perhaps if you tell us an example name that isn't behaving how you want, we (the list membership) can take a look. It sounds like you might want different addresses in the additional section of the response depending on whether the request for for an A record or a record. If so, that's not possible. Regards, Chris ___ 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
[question] new bind option max-recursion-depth
Hi, Bind-user folks, I have a question, about Vulnerability CVE-2014-8500 new bind option max-recursion-depth, I do not know this option meaning. I read ARM Documents I used Bind Version is 9.9.6-P1. -- max-recursion-depth Sets the maximum number of levels of recursion that are permitted at any one time while servicing a recursive query. Resolving a name may require looking up a name server address, which in turn requires resolving another name, etc; if the number of indirections exceeds this value, the recursive query is terminated and returns SERVFAIL. The default is 7. max-recursion-queries Sets the maximum number of iterative queries that may be sent while servicing a recursive query. If more queries are sent, the recursive query is terminated and returns SERV- FAIL. The default is 50. -- Probably meaning of max-recursion-queries is Iterative query max attempt from Cahce Servers. and also, this configuration option it could be confirmed that is to be test servers result Servfail. But, max-recursion-depth, However, it tried but it did not become a Servfail. Meaning of is is Indirections is described in the document, it means that when the authority server that does not come directly returns the IP address, such as the NS and CNAME? Default 7 times the number of times that follow that? Please tell me I think it's my lack of knowledge. I want to know if there is a recommended setting value of everyone regards. ___ 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
Re: ipv6 AAAA register and ipv4 NS register with the same name
In article mailman.1280.1418684210.26362.bind-us...@lists.isc.org, Chris Buxton cli...@buxtonfamily.us wrote: It sounds like you might want different addresses in the additional section of the response depending on whether the request for for an A record or a record. If so, that's not possible. I suspect what he's actually having trouble with is registering nameservers with his registrar, and nothing actually to do with BIND. -- Barry Margolin Arlington, MA ___ 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
Re: [question] new bind option max-recursion-depth
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 11:13:17AM +0900, Techs_Maru wrote: But, max-recursion-depth, However, it tried but it did not become a Servfail. Meaning of is is Indirections is described in the document, it means that when the authority server that does not come directly returns the IP address, such as the NS and CNAME? Default 7 times the number of times that follow that? Suppose a zone is served by name servers in another zone: example.com. IN NS ns1.example.org. example.com. IN NS ns2.example.org. So named has to look up ns1.example.org to find that name server. That adds a layer of recursion depth. Now, if example.org is served out of yet another zone: example.org. IN NS ns1.example.net. example.org. IN NS ns2.example.net. ...that adds another layer. Named will give up after 7 such indirections. -- Evan Hunt -- e...@isc.org Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ___ 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
