Both FreeBSD 6 and 7 are years past their End of Life date, and are no
longer supported. The oldest supported branch is 8.4-RELEASE.
--
Daniel Ryšlink
System Administrator
Dial Telecom a. s.
Kr(ižíkova 36a/237
186 00 Praha 3, C(eská Republika
Tel.:+420.226204627
daniel.rysl...@dialtelecom.cz
Shawn Zhou shawnzho...@yahoo.com wrote:
Any problem has problem building BIND 9.10 for FreeBSD? We are using the
same process that worked for building 9.9.4 to build 9.10 on FreeBSD
6.x/7.x but we are getting ld: invalid BFD target error.
Yes. BIND's linking stage changed between 9.9 and 9.10
You might try changing your update-policy from:
grant johnmill-dnst...@lab.brandeis.edu zonesub ANY;
grant * zonesub ANY;
to
grant johnmill-dnst...@lab.brandeis.edu zonesub ANY;
grant LAB.BRANDEIS.EDU zonesub ANY;
I’m not positive this is the proper syntax since we don’t use the zonesub
Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
U, since upgrade 9.9.5 to 9.10 every request to the name server is
spewing copious amounts of debug type data (thankfully I only upgraded
the one server)
Was debug left on in the final release source code? :)
When I was running pre-release
Thanks for explanation and solution!
I just tested the change and worked fine.
On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 7:32 AM, Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote:
Shawn Zhou shawnzho...@yahoo.com wrote:
Any problem has problem building BIND 9.10 for FreeBSD? We are using the
same process that worked for
Hello All,
Here's an easy one.
I administer a zone that consists of a few names, each of which points to a
name in a zone that I do not administer.
Now my project manager wants to resolve the domain name of my zone to another
name in that foreign zone.
Can I tell him that it can't be done,
The apex name of a zone can't own a CNAME, if that's what you're asking.
E.g. the name example.com can't be a CNAME pointing at
otherexample.com.
But, of course, you can certainly put A and/or records at the apex,
that resolve to one or more addresses in one or more ranges you don't
Yup, that's what I was asking. Thanks.
Gloria Rom
UCLA Library Digital Initiatives and Information Technology
glor...@library.ucla.edumailto:glor...@library.ucla.edu
310-206-9784
From: bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Darcy
Sent:
Thanks to both Mark and Nicholas for the help. Unfortunately, still not
able to get this working (BIND 9.8.2 (RHEL 6) AD 2008R2). It's a case
of AD negotiating a TKEY (successfully), then reverting back to unsigned
updates. If an update's not signed, doesn't matter what your
update-policy
Hi,
For those of you who operate at multiple sites or datacenters, are you doing
any HA for your BIND masters? Ideally, we would have a master in each
datacenter; maybe not an active one, but one that is standing by in case your
primary master becomes unavailable.
Do you have multiple
Josh,
we use multiple masters across multiple hosts, with mysql as a backend for the
zone data.
Each DNS server is a master and has it’s own local mysql DB.
Each mysql database is then kept in ‘sync’ using mysql replication over a VPN
link from a single
(private) admin host.
The single admin
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 06:20:11PM +, Baird, Josh wrote:
Hi,
For those of you who operate at multiple sites or datacenters, are you
doing any HA for your BIND masters? Ideally, we would have a master in
each datacenter; maybe not an active one, but one that is standing by in
case your
I am wondering why a particular test of 9.10.0 is failing and how it can be
fixed.
It happens repeatedly with linux on two different hardware platforms.
I:System test result summary:
I: 1 FAIL
I: 63 PASS
I: 4 SKIPPED
T:xfer:1:A
A:System test xfer
I:testing basic zone transfer
On 06/05/2014 19:39, Evan Hunt wrote:
I don't want to influence the conversation here by saying too much about
the ideas we've had so far, but I wanted to say: if anyone has specific
thoughts on how to make this sort of thing easier in BIND -- even just at
the level of boy, it irritates me that
On 5/6/14, 3:41 PM, Phil Mayers wrote:
I could expand on the idea if people don't think it's too insane ;o) I
suspect it has all kinds of caveats I haven't thought of, however.
The concept of a meta-zone containing config data is something that I
discussed with a number of ISC staff over the
In message alpine.lsu.2.00.1405061457310.1...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk, Tony Fi
nch writes:
Shawn Zhou shawnzho...@yahoo.com wrote:
Any problem has problem building BIND 9.10 for FreeBSD? We are using the
same process that worked for building 9.9.4 to build 9.10 on FreeBSD
6.x/7.x but we
In message 2ddim91ft8u2u4uelvoqeajer8idpj6...@4ax.com, J. Thomsen writes:
I am wondering why a particular test of 9.10.0 is failing and how it can be=
fixed.
It happens repeatedly with linux on two different hardware platforms.
I:System test result summary:
I: 1 FAIL
I: 63
I need to provide DNS64 on a caching resolver for a project (MS direct
access). It will mostly be resolving internal names, most of which are
delegated to an LB. The requests will be arriving over v4 only (nat64
already in place).
Here is the setup:
for simplicity I will show one authoritative
I can’t download the source for 9.10.0.
www.isc.org/downloads/#
Click on Download for 9.10.0. Modal-1 appears.
Click on BIND 9.10.0 - tar.gz.
It tries to download:
http://www.isc.org/downloads/file/bind-9-10-0b1-2/?version=tar.gz
and fails. Looks like that link is wrong.
Anyone else having
In message 9cd0cbfd-743d-455a-9000-6ceb8d926...@bordo.com.au, James Brown wri
tes:
I can't download the source for 9.10.0.
www.isc.org/downloads/#
Click on Download for 9.10.0. Modal-1 appears.
Click on BIND 9.10.0 - tar.gz.
It tries to download:
This week several of our customers have contacted us to inquire
about our reaction to an article entitled Critical Vulnerability
in BIND Software Puts DNS Protocol Security at Risk [1]
ISC would like to clarify that we evaluated the risk from this issue
in 2013 when it was disclosed to us, and
21 matches
Mail list logo
