On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 17:37:47 +
Joe Dahlquist wrote:
> N6Ghost,
>
> Re: DNS Firewall options on bind, a shameless plug for Threatstop.com
> and the first you should investigate.
>
> Other sources of RPZ with quality data you can look at: Farsight,
> SURBL, Spamhaus
>
> Regards,
> Joe
N6Ghost,
Re: DNS Firewall options on bind, a shameless plug for Threatstop.com and
the first you should investigate.
Other sources of RPZ with quality data you can look at: Farsight, SURBL,
Spamhaus
Regards,
Joe Dahlquist
On 10/26/18, 9:49 AM, "bind-users on behalf of N6Ghost"
wrote:
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:52:17 -0400
Kevin Darcy wrote:
> My basic rule of thumb is: use forwarding when connectivity
> constraints require it. Those constraints may be architectural, e.g.
> a multi-tiered, multi-layer network for security purposes, or may be
> the result of screwups or unintended
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 10:40:40 -0400
Bob Harold wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 4:34 PM N6Ghost wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > have two questions first, I am not a huge fan of using forwarding
> > zones and our "load balancing" team, has there zone delegated to
> > them in a way that needs an
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 09:46:39 -0600
Grant Taylor via bind-users wrote:
> On 10/26/2018 01:08 AM, N6Ghost wrote:
> > maybe its just old habits,
>
> Fair enough. I know that I have plenty of my own old (¿bad?) habits
> too.
>
> > i think its a bad idea to build your infrastructure in a way the
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 09:50:31 -0600
Grant Taylor via bind-users wrote:
> On 10/26/2018 08:52 AM, Kevin Darcy wrote:
> > My basic rule of thumb is: use forwarding when connectivity
> > constraints require it. Those constraints may be architectural,
> > e.g. a multi-tiered, multi-layer network for
On 10/26/2018 08:52 AM, Kevin Darcy wrote:
My basic rule of thumb is: use forwarding when connectivity constraints
require it. Those constraints may be architectural, e.g. a multi-tiered,
multi-layer network for security purposes, or may be the result of
screwups or unintended consequences,
On 10/26/2018 01:08 AM, N6Ghost wrote:
maybe its just old habits,
Fair enough. I know that I have plenty of my own old (¿bad?) habits too.
i think its a bad idea to build your infrastructure in a way the needs
forward zones to work. not when you can build it with proper delegation.
i just
My basic rule of thumb is: use forwarding when connectivity constraints
require it. Those constraints may be architectural, e.g. a multi-tiered,
multi-layer network for security purposes, or may be the result of screwups
or unintended consequences, e.g. a routing blackhole. Use forwarding to get
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 4:34 PM N6Ghost wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> have two questions first, I am not a huge fan of using forwarding zones
> and our "load balancing" team, has there zone delegated to them in a
> way that needs an internal forward zone to work properly on the inside
> and not rely on
On 26/10/2018 08:08, N6Ghost wrote:
> maybe its just old habits, i think its a bad idea to build your
> infrastructure in a way the needs forward zones to work. not when you
> can build it with proper delegation.
>
> i just think when building namespaces proper delegation should be used
> and
On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:57:48 -0600
Grant Taylor via bind-users wrote:
> On 10/25/18 2:34 PM, N6Ghost wrote:
> > I want to move a core namespace to the load balancer but i want
> > them to let me assign them a new zone thats internally
> > authoritative and use it as the LB domain.
> >
> > which
On Thu, 25 Oct 2018 15:57:48 -0600
Grant Taylor via bind-users wrote:
> On 10/25/18 2:34 PM, N6Ghost wrote:
> > I want to move a core namespace to the load balancer but i want
> > them to let me assign them a new zone thats internally
> > authoritative and use it as the LB domain.
> >
> > which
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 2:57 PM Grant Taylor via bind-users <
bind-users@lists.isc.org> wrote:
> On 10/25/18 2:34 PM, N6Ghost wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> > next, we where a bind shop but switched to infoblox for some stuff and
> > now out grew it. and are going back to bind.
> >
> > but we started using
On 10/25/18 2:34 PM, N6Ghost wrote:
I want to move a core namespace to the load balancer but i want them to
let me assign them a new zone thats internally authoritative and use it
as the LB domain.
which would be:
cname name.domain.com -> newname.newzone.domain.com
they want:
cname
15 matches
Mail list logo
