Re: discrepancy with rndc dumpdb -zones

2010-09-01 Thread Cathy Almond
Hi Gordon, We've not seen this before (and it doesn't sound like anyone else has either). What version of BIND is it? Has it reappeared since? Is this a particularly heavily loaded/busy server? Does it have recursive cache as well as authoritative zones? Kind regards, Cathy Gordon A. Lang

Re: discrepancy with rndc dumpdb -zones

2010-09-01 Thread Gordon A. Lang
Almond cat...@isc.org To: bind-users@lists.isc.org Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 6:52 AM Subject: Re: discrepancy with rndc dumpdb -zones Hi Gordon, We've not seen this before (and it doesn't sound like anyone else has either). What version of BIND is it? Has it reappeared since

Re: discrepancy with rndc dumpdb -zones

2010-08-27 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 24.08.10 16:56, Gordon A. Lang wrote: After several successful update delete ... nsupdate sends to the master DNS server, verified with dig, the rndc dumpdb -zones command produced named_dump.db file still showing the deleted records. This was repeatable and persistent (over the half hour

discrepancy with rndc dumpdb -zones

2010-08-24 Thread Gordon A. Lang
After several successful update delete ... nsupdate sends to the master DNS server, verified with dig, the rndc dumpdb -zones command produced named_dump.db file still showing the deleted records. This was repeatable and persistent (over the half hour time period) until I performed a hard