Re: From AWS route 53 to Bind9

2017-02-04 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <1aeb1e7d-f2e2-dd1e-baf2-96729656f...@thelounge.net>, Reindl Harald writes: > > > Am 04.02.2017 um 22:30 schrieb Mark Andrews: > > It has been suggested many times that there should be a record which > > says which server(s) serve a zone for HTTP and HTTPS. We could do > > this with

Re: From AWS route 53 to Bind9

2017-02-04 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 04.02.2017 um 22:30 schrieb Mark Andrews: It has been suggested many times that there should be a record which says which server(s) serve a zone for HTTP and HTTPS. We could do this with SRV (_http._tcp.example.com and _https._tcp.example.com) or we could come up with a new record example.c

Re: From AWS route 53 to Bind9

2017-02-04 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <1983df90-f101-afe4-2fbd-6cb243d60...@gmail.com>, Conconscious writes: > > Sorry I'm blocked in the other email account: > Remote host said: 554 mail server permanently rejected message (#5.3.0) > > I want to keep the 3 web servers and www.domain.com and only domain.com > reference.

Re: From AWS route 53 to Bind9

2017-02-04 Thread Conconscious
Sorry I'm blocked in the other email account: Remote host said: 554 mail server permanently rejected message (#5.3.0) I want to keep the 3 web servers and www.domain.com and only domain.com reference. With current config: www.domain.com. CNAME dualstack.ap-ulb-traffic-2039629984.ap-southeas

Re: From AWS route 53 to Bind9

2017-02-04 Thread Graham Clinch
> [...] But I'm getting errors in bind9. What do the errors say? Perhaps the text will point either you or us to the cause. Graham ___ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailin

Re: Re: Bind Queries log file format

2017-02-04 Thread Timothe Litt
On 04-Feb-17 04:27, Phil Mayers wrote: > On 03/02/17 16:45, Mukund Sivaraman wrote: > >> The query log is getting more fields at the end of it such as >> CLIENT-SUBNET logging. > > Although it would be super-disruptive, has any thought been given to > moving to an entirely new log format, for exam

From AWS route 53 to Bind9

2017-02-04 Thread Cogumelos Maravilha
Hi all, I have a domain in AWS route 53 with this lines: domain.com. A ALIAS dualstack.ap-ulb-traffic-2039629984.ap-southeast-1.elb.amazonaws.com. domain.com. A ALIAS dualstack.ulb-traffic-eu-136029011.eu-central-1.elb.amazonaws.com. domain.com. A ALIAS dualstack.ulb-traffic-1103250353.us-east-1.

Re: Bind Queries log file format

2017-02-04 Thread Phil Mayers
On 04/02/2017 09:18, Phil Mayers wrote: On 03/02/17 16:53, Alan Clegg wrote: The "rndc" option allows those that KNOW that they may need the data begin the collection where everyone else isn't impacted. If you know that this customer is at risk, tell them "run this command, it's going FWIW,

Re: Bind Queries log file format

2017-02-04 Thread Phil Mayers
On 03/02/17 16:45, Mukund Sivaraman wrote: The query log is getting more fields at the end of it such as CLIENT-SUBNET logging. Although it would be super-disruptive, has any thought been given to moving to an entirely new log format, for example k/v or JSON? They're a lot more extendable go

Re: Bind Queries log file format

2017-02-04 Thread Phil Mayers
On 03/02/17 16:53, Alan Clegg wrote: The "rndc" option allows those that KNOW that they may need the data begin the collection where everyone else isn't impacted. If you know that this customer is at risk, tell them "run this command, it's going FWIW, I would tend to agree with this approach;