-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 2013-02-13 at 14:15 -0500, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> I am not up to building on my own and the few extra repos I work with
> (EPEL and rpmfusion) do not have a newer version all ready for Centos
> 6.3.
You might try
http://www.five-ten-sg.com/
In message <00f701ce0a3f$5cc75db0$16561910$@net>, "Paul A" writes:
>
> Chris this is not a dynamic zone, I do have NS RR. I had to completely
> restart bind for it to work. No matter what I did with the serial it
> wouldn't change. Never had to do this before so it's a bit odd.
>
>
>
> Named-
On Feb 13, 2013, at 6:10 PM, Paul A wrote:
> Chris this is not a dynamic zone, I do have NS RR. I had to completely
> restart bind for it to work. No matter what I did with the serial it wouldn’t
> change. Never had to do this before so it’s a bit odd.
>
> Named-checkzone gave me no errors a
Chris this is not a dynamic zone, I do have NS RR. I had to completely
restart bind for it to work. No matter what I did with the serial it
wouldn't change. Never had to do this before so it's a bit odd.
Named-checkzone gave me no errors and rndc reload worked fine but the zone
wouldn't update.
LinkedIn
I'd like to include you in my network to share updates and stay in touch.
- Michel
Michel BESNARD
Network Architect for Access Networks at Orange France / FT
Paris Area, France
Confirm that you know Michel BESNARD:
https://www.linkedin.com/e/m1ka4g-hd4zjblg-5i/isd/110620
On 02/13/2013 03:40 PM, Mike Hoskins (michoski) wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Robert Moskowitz
Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 2:15 PM
To: Mike Hoskins
Cc: "bind-users@lists.isc.org"
Subject: Re: chroot/etc/named/ directory?
Having said all that, you might search the archives
-Original Message-
From: Robert Moskowitz
Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 2:15 PM
To: Mike Hoskins
Cc: "bind-users@lists.isc.org"
Subject: Re: chroot/etc/named/ directory?
>>Having said all that, you might search the archives (SRPMS have been
>> provided by community members) or oth
On 10/24/2012 11:56 AM, Chris Buxton wrote:
On Oct 23, 2012, at 5:17 PM, Christian Tardif wrote:
Hi,
I have a strange BIND behaviour I don't know how to handle. As I don't exactly
know how to describe it, I'll rather explain what I did and what happens. But
not quite easy to follow.
In my t
On 02/13/2013 01:44 PM, Lightner, Jeff wrote:
Haven't done it on RHEL/CentOS 6.x yet but in RHEL5 with the bind-chroot
installed I've always had:
/var/named/chroot as the jail for BIND.
/var/named/chroot/etc = Location of global config files such as named.conf
/var/named/chroot/var/named = Loca
On 02/13/2013 12:43 PM, Mike Hoskins (michoski) wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Robert Moskowitz
Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 10:53 AM
To: "bind-users@lists.isc.org"
Subject: chroot/etc/named/ directory?
I am upgrading my server from bind-9.3.6 via Centos 5.5 to 9.8.2 in
Cento
Also make sure you’ve incremented the serial number in the zone file by at
least 1.
From: bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of
Chris Buxton
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 12:58 PM
To: Paul A
Cc: b
Haven't done it on RHEL/CentOS 6.x yet but in RHEL5 with the bind-chroot
installed I've always had:
/var/named/chroot as the jail for BIND.
/var/named/chroot/etc = Location of global config files such as named.conf
/var/named/chroot/var/named = Location of the zone files.
I don't see a /var/named
On Feb 13, 2013, at 9:22 AM, Paul A wrote:
> Can anyone tell help me figure out why this SOA is not changing no matter
> what I do. The zone was edited and has a new SOA but no matter what I do bind
> doesn’t reload the zone with the new SOA. I tried rndc freeze/unfreeze and
> still nothing. Sh
On Feb 12, 2013, at 7:00 PM, Nick Urbanik wrote:
> We have a pair of DNS servers running BIND behind a direct routing LVS
> director pair running keepalived. Let's call these two DNS servers A
> and B, and the VIP V.
>
> They slave from a hidden master; let's call it M.
>
> I want to allow anoth
-Original Message-
From: Robert Moskowitz
Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 10:53 AM
To: "bind-users@lists.isc.org"
Subject: chroot/etc/named/ directory?
>I am upgrading my server from bind-9.3.6 via Centos 5.5 to 9.8.2 in
>Centos 6.3.
>
>I have and will run bind chrooted and on my tes
Can anyone tell help me figure out why this SOA is not changing no matter
what I do. The zone was edited and has a new SOA but no matter what I do
bind doesn't reload the zone with the new SOA. I tried rndc freeze/unfreeze
and still nothing. Short of reloading bind what else can I do.
TIA, Paul
I am upgrading my server from bind-9.3.6 via Centos 5.5 to 9.8.2 in
Centos 6.3.
I have and will run bind chrooted and on my test setup I noticed a 'new'
subdirectory in the chroot tree:
/var/named/chroot/etc/named/
I cannot find any documentation as what is indended to be placed in this
sub
On 13/02/13 15:34, Tony Finch wrote:
Nick Urbanik wrote:
I think that it is not necessarily always true that you should avoid a
load balancer. Every day, our DNS caches are answering about 140,000
queries per second. I think that it is rather hard to configure
resolvers to query only three m
Nick Urbanik wrote:
>
> I think that it is not necessarily always true that you should avoid a
> load balancer. Every day, our DNS caches are answering about 140,000
> queries per second. I think that it is rather hard to configure
> resolvers to query only three machines yet still meet the dema
On 13/02/13 14:30, Nick Urbanik wrote:
I think that it is not necessarily always true that you should avoid a
load balancer. Every day, our DNS caches are answering about 140,000
queries per second. I think that it is rather hard to configure
resolvers to query only three machines yet still m
Dear WBrown,
Thank you for your helpful reply.
On 13/02/13 08:11 -0500, wbr...@e1b.org wrote:
Nick wrote on 02/12/2013 10:00:27 PM:
We have a pair of DNS servers running BIND behind a direct routing LVS
director pair running keepalived. Let's call these two DNS servers A
and B, and the VIP V
Nick wrote on 02/12/2013 10:00:27 PM:
> We have a pair of DNS servers running BIND behind a direct routing LVS
> director pair running keepalived. Let's call these two DNS servers A
> and B, and the VIP V.
Several years ago I was lucky enough to take the ISC class on bind. One of
my questions g
22 matches
Mail list logo
