Re: Reverse DNS record for my webhost

2018-08-06 Thread Grant Taylor via bind-users
On 08/06/2018 08:29 PM, A wrote: I have a VPS and requested my webhost to fix reverse DNS for my domain & IP.  They responded by telling me to provide them with the records I want. I found the following response to someone's question on the *Net*: Many ISPs will put in CNAME records

Reverse DNS record for my webhost

2018-08-06 Thread A
I have a VPS and requested my webhost to fix reverse DNS for my domain & IP.  They responded by telling me to provide them with the records I want. I found the following response to someone's question on the *Net*: Many ISPs will put in CNAME records with values that have a

Re: named tcp dos?

2018-08-06 Thread Greg Rivers
On Thursday, August 02, 2018 18:13:21 Randy Bush wrote: > > We run about 300 TLD's on our DNS platform and get roughly 5-10% TCP > > queries. > > that is quite a variance > > > In comparison, we get about 25-30% IPv6 queries. > > wonder how that compares to others > On the secondaries for a

Re: Question regarding different responses that I am getting for a lookup.

2018-08-06 Thread Lee
On 8/6/18, Bhangui, Sandeep - BLS CTR wrote: > Hello > > Not sure why I am getting different responses when I perform a dig on > sso.dol.gov. > > Dig is performed from a server which is capable of querying the root > servers….what could be the issue. Probably because the bls.gov server gets a

Re: Question regarding different responses that I am getting for a lookup.

2018-08-06 Thread Peter DeVries
They are probably using a load balancer of some sort that is choosing between multiple systems and directing you to the one closest or no under load at the moment. The low TTL is usually a sign of this as well. On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 2:12 PM, Bhangui, Sandeep - BLS CTR <

Question regarding different responses that I am getting for a lookup.

2018-08-06 Thread Bhangui, Sandeep - BLS CTR
Hello Not sure why I am getting different responses when I perform a dig on sso.dol.gov. Dig is performed from a server which is capable of querying the root servers….what could be the issue. Both dig commands below are run from the same server which acts as DNS server capable of performing

Re: Need to move an NS server out of service

2018-08-06 Thread Alberto Colosi
sorry for missing letters but my keyboard ia broken so to say, usually DNS admin low TTL on NS and/or A records that will have a change look bind docs to apply it without specific record TTL , SOA ttl is used From: bind-users on behalf of King, Harold

Re: Need to move an NS server out of service

2018-08-06 Thread Alberto Colosi
No , you have to NOT REMOVE untile epire of SOA TTL the DNS A record and don't stop DNS engine if you don't want loss of name resolution on your domain Remove NS record from your zone and restart engine so slaves and internet can be updated after epire of SOA TTL you can remove A record and

Need to move an NS server out of service

2018-08-06 Thread King, Harold Clyde (Hal)
I have ns2.example.com one of my DNS servers. The building, and the reason for the NS server, is ending. Should I remove the host from our domain name provider then my actual NS record in DNS, or NS record then provider? I'd appreciate any help I could get. -- Hal King

DNS and keepalived

2018-08-06 Thread Leroy Tennison
As previously posted, I just added a slave of a master for disaster recovery and now need to know how to promote it should the master be offline too long. An additional complicating factor is that the master and slave exist on a failover pair managed by keepalived. My web search has found a

Promote slave DNS server

2018-08-06 Thread Leroy Tennison
If there is already an ISC document I didn't find it, please provide the URL. I just added a slave of a master for disaster recovery and now need to know how to promote it should the master be offline too long. What I have found so far is: 1. For the zone definitions in /etc/named.conf (or

Re: named tcp dos?

2018-08-06 Thread Tony Finch
Randy Bush wrote: > > an aside: folk seem to be in the 20% range for ipv6, while overall > backbone traffic stats are about half that. are dns caches more likely > to be v6 enabled than the average bear? I get the impression from various discussions that yes, they are. Actual citation: