come to the idea swap anything
out anyways
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Reindl Harald
Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 12:19 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Writeable file already in use
Am 05.
oun...@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Reindl Harald
Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 12:19 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Writeable file already in use
Am 05.01.2016 um 18:03 schrieb Barry Margolin:
In article ,
Alan Clegg wrote:
On 1/5/
...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Reindl Harald
Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2016 12:19 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Writeable file already in use
Am 05.01.2016 um 18:03 schrieb Barry Margolin:
> In article ,
> Alan Clegg wrote:
>
>> On 1/5/16 6:26 AM, Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
Am 05.01.2016 um 18:03 schrieb Barry Margolin:
In article ,
Alan Clegg wrote:
On 1/5/16 6:26 AM, Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
This might make you sad if you have lots of zones or large zones.
.. or even just want to look at what was transferred (whitout having to
recurse to a `dig axfr').
I se
On 05/01/2016 17:03, Barry Margolin wrote:
> The in-memory copy is likely to end up in the swap partition.
A swap partition? I don't think I've seen one of those for years...
Ray
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
In article ,
Alan Clegg wrote:
> On 1/5/16 6:26 AM, Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
> >> This might make you sad if you have lots of zones or large zones.
> >
> > .. or even just want to look at what was transferred (whitout having to
> > recurse to a `dig axfr').
> >
> > I see no reason to omit 'file' (
On 1/5/16 6:26 AM, Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
>> This might make you sad if you have lots of zones or large zones.
>
> .. or even just want to look at what was transferred (whitout having to
> recurse to a `dig axfr').
>
> I see no reason to omit 'file' (except on a diskless slave ;-)
I ran into one e
Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
> This might make you sad if you have lots of zones or large zones.
> .. or even just want to look at what was transferred (whitout having to
> recurse to a `dig axfr').
>
> I see no reason to omit 'file' (except on a diskless slave
Or if you care about availability, which is
> This might make you sad if you have lots of zones or large zones.
.. or even just want to look at what was transferred (whitout having to
recurse to a `dig axfr').
I see no reason to omit 'file' (except on a diskless slave ;-)
-JP
___
Please
Jan-Piet Mens wrote:
>
> For a non-signed zone I note the transfer indeed works without a 'file'
> specification, and I note it's not stored on file anywhere (just in
> core).
Yes, so (as you have probably guessed) the server has to retransfer the
zone from scratch when it is restarted. This migh
> but I believe it's optional otherwise.
You are correct (of course). I had inline signing enabled.
For a non-signed zone I note the transfer indeed works without a 'file'
specification, and I note it's not stored on file anywhere (just in
core).
Thanks for clarifying.
-JP
_
> I was going to yell "TIL from Evan, that 'file' is optional for a
> slave", but
>
> /etc/named.conf:545: zone 'example.com': missing 'file' entry
>
> This is on 9.10.3. Did I misunderstand you?
Do you use inline-signing? It's mandatory in that case (named needs to
know where to put t
> Change the filenames on the slave, or just don't have a "file" option
> in the slave zone configuration.
I was going to yell "TIL from Evan, that 'file' is optional for a
slave", but
/etc/named.conf:545: zone 'example.com': missing 'file' entry
This is on 9.10.3. Did I misunderstand y
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 05:13:55PM -0700, Sathyan Arjunan wrote:
> Recently, I updated my bind from 9.9.5 to 9.9.8-P2 from then I seen
> problems with me named configuration. Interestingly, I seen this problem
> only on my slaves NOT on Master DNS.
>
> I am using multiple zones pointing to a same
Am 05.01.2016 um 01:13 schrieb Sathyan Arjunan:
Recently, I updated my bind from 9.9.5 to 9.9.8-P2 from then I seen
problems with me named configuration. Interestingly, I seen this problem
only on my slaves NOT on Master DNS.
I am using multiple zones pointing to a same file
this is not supp
Team,
Recently, I updated my bind from 9.9.5 to 9.9.8-P2 from then I seen
problems with me named configuration. Interestingly, I seen this problem
only on my slaves NOT on Master DNS.
I am using multiple zones pointing to a same file. This configuration has
been in place for nearly 10 years with
16 matches
Mail list logo
