CNAME+A record in response

2012-06-29 Thread Srinivas Krishnan
A lot of times we get responses that look like: FOO.BAR CNAME EXAMPLE.BAR EXAMPLE.BAR A 1.1.1.1 BIND currently (atleast with the default settings) when it encounters a CNAME stops processing and checks if EXAMPLE.BAR is in cache or else sends out another query to resolve it even though the A

A records in response with CNAME records

2012-06-29 Thread Srinivas Krishnan
A lot of times we get responses that look like: a.b.c.d CNAME x.y.z x.y.z IP 1.1.1.1 BIND always sends out an additional query as soon as it encounters the CNAME it stops processing and either x.y.z. is in cache or needs another query to respond. Is there a setting in BIND to actually use

Re: A records in response with CNAME records

2012-06-29 Thread Mark Andrews
Stop spamming the list with essentially the same question. comp.protocols.dns.bind and bind-us...@isc.org are bi-directionally gatewayed. And to answer your question. No there isn't a switch. In message 92e42992-d0be-4d53-b0dc-866102a4e...@googlegroups.com, Srinivas Kr ishnan writes: A lot

Re: CNAME+A record in response

2012-06-29 Thread Phil Mayers
On 06/29/2012 07:50 AM, Srinivas Krishnan wrote: A lot of times we get responses that look like: FOO.BAR CNAME EXAMPLE.BAR EXAMPLE.BAR A 1.1.1.1 BIND currently (atleast with the default settings) when it encounters a CNAME stops processing and checks if EXAMPLE.BAR is in cache or else sends

BIND, DNSSEC AD

2012-06-29 Thread Carsten Strotmann
Hello JT, I'm currently working on integrating MS DNSSEC (on Windows 2012) and BIND here @ Men Mice for another customer. I might have a solution for you, but I need more detail information about your setup. I will contact you by E-Mail on Monday (I hope that is not too late). -- Carsten

Re: BIND, DNSSEC AD

2012-06-29 Thread John Williams
The purpose behind this is not to protect the internal AD DNS from hijacking.  But rather to allow internal clients to run DNSSEC related queries without having to reference external resolvers. dig +dnssec somedomain By the way, integrating BIND into AD will not be permitted.  The AD staff

Corrupt zone transfer

2012-06-29 Thread Danny Horne
Hi all, I currently run two Bind 9.9.* nameservers (details below), I've just added a slave zone to the Windows one, the Linux one being the master. The zone transferred, however, seems to be corrupt in that when opened in Notepad it contains what I can only describe as gobbledegook. The master

Re: Corrupt zone transfer

2012-06-29 Thread Lyle Giese
On 06/29/12 10:10, Danny Horne wrote: Hi all, I currently run two Bind 9.9.* nameservers (details below), I've just added a slave zone to the Windows one, the Linux one being the master. The zone transferred, however, seems to be corrupt in that when opened in Notepad it contains what I can

Re: Corrupt zone transfer

2012-06-29 Thread Danny Horne
Thanks Todd, Seeing it cleanly when doing that so I guess the zone file itself is ok On 29 June 2012 16:24, Todd Snyder tsny...@rim.com wrote: From your slave, if you do ** ** dig @[master server] zonename AXFR ** ** Do you get nice text, or garbage? ** ** *From:*

Re: Corrupt zone transfer

2012-06-29 Thread Tony Finch
Danny Horne da...@thelake.me wrote: I currently run two Bind 9.9.* nameservers (details below), I've just added a slave zone to the Windows one, the Linux one being the master.  The zone transferred, however, seems to be corrupt in that when opened in Notepad it contains what I can only