I tried to google this but could not hit the right keywords (been a long
week)...
I have 3 hosts on a domain (example.com) like so:
int.project A 10.10.10.2
stage.project A 10.10.10.3
test.project A 10.10.10.4
Now I want
Am Tue, 24 May 2011 09:55:19 +0100
schrieb John Kennedy skeb...@gmail.com:
I tried to google this but could not hit the right keywords (been a long
week)...
I have 3 hosts on a domain (example.com) like so:
int.project A 10.10.10.2
stage.project A
That worked. Thanks guys.
John
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:25, Matus UHLAR - fantomas uh...@fantomas.skwrote:
On 24.05.11 09:55, John Kennedy wrote:
I tried to google this but could not hit the right keywords (been a long
week)...
I have 3 hosts on a domain (example.com) like so:
Chris Thompson writes:
We are getting DNSSEC-related SERVFAILs on names in bund.de (e.g.
mx1.bind.de). This happens with all of BIND 9.7.3-P1, 9.7.4b1 and
9.8.0-P1 configured with the root and dlv.isc.org trust anchors.
However, I can't see what is actually wrong with it, using dig +cd as
On May 24 2011, I wrote:
We are getting DNSSEC-related SERVFAILs on names in bund.de (e.g.
mx1.bind.de). This happens with all of BIND 9.7.3-P1, 9.7.4b1 and
9.8.0-P1 configured with the root and dlv.isc.org trust anchors.
However, I can't see what is actually wrong with it, using dig +cd as
On May 24 2011, I wrote:
[...]
That seems almost certain to be the precipitating event, in fact.
I can produce the same effect for all 31 zones that are both registered
in dlv.isc.org *and* have a DS record in dlv.isc.org:
Aaargh ... I meant *and* have a DS record in de, of course.
--
Chris
Hi all.
I have set up a simple bind config to test this. I am very obviously
missing something simple here, but i can't figure out what it is for
some reason.
I am trying to delegate name servers for the subdomain
sccnj04.example.com to ns sip.example.com.
When i dig i get no error, but also no
I'm being hit by a collection of scoundrels all using source port 53,
seeking 'x.kyuhhh.strangled.net/TXT/IN'. No, I am not authoritative
for that name. This happened on cardinal.lizella.net.
Attackers:
=
50.19.102.31 :: ec2-50-19-102-31.compute-1.amazonaws.com.
50.19.106.0 ::
Hi Dalton,
Tue, 24 May 2011 10:09:00 -0700 dalton stickney wrote:
Hi all.
I have set up a simple bind config to test this. I am very obviously
missing something simple here, but i can't figure out what it is for
some reason.
I am trying to delegate name servers for the subdomain
Hi list,
I have a doubt about querys, as fact I'd like to deny just querys type MX.
Other querys types must be available. Is it possible?
Thanks
--
Igor Cagnin
Email: icag...@timbrasil.com.brmailto:icag...@timbrasil.com.br
___
bind-users mailing
dalton stickney wrote:
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;sccnj04.example.com. IN NS
So, you ask for sccnj04.example.com, but apparantly that's not what you
have in your zonefile:
$ORIGIN sccnj04.example.com.
sccnj04 IN NS sip.example.com.
The $ORIGIN
List,
Has any one run into a issue with two named processes running on the same
host. We want to begin serving up DNS on our IPv6 address space and do not
want to duplicate each of our DNS servers. We have started two named
processes one with -6 option. All seems to be working. I am concerned
Is anyone else seeing odd results with news.google.com? My BIND 9
master and slave are getting different results. If I go out to other
sites such as Kloth.net or iptools.com they also get different results
from each other and different from what my master and slave are
reporting.
I'm
Igor da Silva Cagnin wrote:
I have a doubt about querys, as fact I'd like to deny just querys type MX.
Other querys types must be available. Is it possible?
Not with a regular BIND 9, no - at least not that I'm aware of.
I guess it can be done by hacking the source code, but is it worth it?
On 05/24/11 20:22, Timothy Stoddard wrote:
List,
Has any one run into a issue with two named processes running on the
same host. We want to begin serving up DNS on our IPv6 address space
and do not want to duplicate each of our DNS servers. We have started
two named processes one with -6
Timothy Stoddard wrote:
Has any one run into a issue with two named processes running on the same
host. We want to begin serving up DNS on our IPv6 address space and do
not
want to duplicate each of our DNS servers. We have started two named
processes one with -6 option. All seems to be
On May 24, 2011, at 1:55 PM, Igor da Silva Cagnin wrote:
Hi list,
I have a doubt about querys, as fact I’d like to deny just querys type MX.
Other querys types must be available. Is it possible?
Yes.
1: Don't list the MX record in your zone.
or
2: Have multiple views, one with MX
Lightner, Jeff wrote:
Is anyone else seeing odd results with news.google.com? My BIND 9
master and slave are getting different results. If I go out to other
Normally, you'd have master/slave nameservers in different networks - is
this the case here as well for your servers? Will their
On May 24, 2011, at 2:28 PM, Lightner, Jeff wrote:
Is anyone else seeing odd results with news.google.com? My BIND 9 master
and slave are getting different results.
Presumably your slave and master are in different subnets?
Google (and many other large networks) perform geolocation and
On 05/24/2011 11:22, Timothy Stoddard wrote:
List,
Has any one run into a issue with two named processes running on the
same host. We want to begin serving up DNS on our IPv6 address space
and do not want to duplicate each of our DNS servers. We have started
two named processes one with -6
They aren't in different subnets from an internet perspective and are
not geographically separated. (Yes I know not best practice but I
don't make those decisions.)
The master is dswadns1.water.com at 12.44.84.213 and the slave is
dswadns2.water.com at 12.44.84.214.
The fact they are not in
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 13:22 -0500, Timothy Stoddard wrote:
Has any one run into a issue with two named processes running on the
same host. We want to begin serving up DNS on our IPv6 address space
and do not want to duplicate each of our DNS servers. We have started
two named processes one
And are those definitely the source addresses that the queries are coming from
(e.g you don't have multiple interfaces / tunnels? you are not forwarding, etc?)
W
On May 24, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Lightner, Jeff wrote:
They aren't in different subnets from an internet perspective and are
not
On 05/24/11 12:55, Igor da Silva Cagnin wrote:
I have a doubt about querys, as fact I'd like to deny just querys
type MX. Other querys types must be available. Is it possible?
Would using response-policy zone filtering to alter MX queries suffice?
Grant. . . .
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 02:28:42PM -0400, Lightner, Jeff wrote:
Is anyone else seeing odd results with news.google.com? My BIND
9 master and slave are getting different results. If I go out
to other sites such as Kloth.net or iptools.com they also get
different results from each other and
Lightner, Jeff wrote:
The master is dswadns1.water.com at 12.44.84.213 and the slave is
dswadns2.water.com at 12.44.84.214.
So, they leave your network in the same way, through the same router etc?
Are they configured to use any forwarders? Stub-zones? Etc? Or do they
both talk directly out to
On 05/24/2011 13:48, Matthew Seaman wrote:
named_flags=-c /etc/namedb/named.conf
If your /etc is up to date this is no longer necessary, as
/etc/defaults/rc.conf has named_conf=/etc/namedb/named.conf already.
hth,
Doug
--
Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
Thanks to all of you for the great advice and insights! Everything is
working now, it was a combination of different issues and the advice
i received was invaluable to solving the issues.
Thanks again!
dalton
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Andrey G. Sergeev (AKA Andris)
and...@aernet.ru
28 matches
Mail list logo
