On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:46:29AM +0800,
Tech W. tech...@yahoo.com.cn wrote
a message of 14 lines which said:
When an upper DNS returns a domain's authorised DNS server, will it
also returns the authorised DNS server's IP address? So glue record
works as this way?
Why don't you test?
Mark Andrews wrote:
In message 4a093b9c.5060...@afnic.fr, sandoche BALAKRICHENAN writes:
I want to rewrite a query of the form
sgtin.5.4.0.0.0.1.3.2.4.5.6.7.6.id.onsam.test to
sgtin.5.4.0.0.0.1.3.2.4.5.6.7.6.id.onseu.test using NAPTR rewrite.
The NAPTR RR in the zone config is as follows:
Hello -
(bind9.6.0-P1)
I have set up a zone that is signed.
It is an island of security zone for testing purposes.
I have set up a TSIG key and set the allow-update
to accept the key.
I have followed every step, afaict, in the various
how-tos on how to sign a zone.
But when I try to do an
I am running bind in a chroot jail, btw.
I had this working a while ago, and left it for a while
and then tried to set it up again, with no luck.
I am sure it is something simple...
--
Jack Tavares
From: bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org
In message 4b18a8f75a6384449755bc7784073e93603b776...@exch11.olympus.f5net.com
Hello -
(bind9.6.0-P1)
I have set up a zone that is signed.
It is an island of security zone for testing purposes.
I have set up a TSIG key and set the allow-update
to accept the key.
I have followed
--- On Wed, 13/5/09, Stephane Bortzmeyer bortzme...@nic.fr wrote:
Glue was sent back since wanadoo.fr's name servers are
under
wanadoo.fr .
Ok please see dig info below.
if I understand for it correctly, gdpu.cn is not under b.dns.cn, why b.dns.cn
returns glues?
Thanks.
# dig
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 03:37:19PM +0800,
Tech W. tech...@yahoo.com.cn wrote
a message of 39 lines which said:
if I understand for it correctly, gdpu.cn is not under b.dns.cn,
True, but irrelevant.
why b.dns.cn returns glues?
Because the name servers of gdpu.cn are under gdpu.cn.
In article gudtlf$1u4...@sf1.isc.org,
Tech W. tech...@yahoo.com.cn wrote:
--- On Wed, 13/5/09, Stephane Bortzmeyer bortzme...@nic.fr wrote:
Glue was sent back since wanadoo.fr's name servers are
under
wanadoo.fr .
Ok please see dig info below.
if I understand for it correctly,
yes.
And I when I previously failed to specify the correct key-directory, I got an
error
found no private keys, unable to generate any signatures
I corrected that error and now get the failure message
everything is owned by named .
options {
dnssec-enable yes;
dnssec-validation yes;
I have a glue (nameserver host) record which hasn't been used in years and I
want to delete it (and ultimately re-use the name). Attempting a delete through
UKreg (Fasthosts) gives me this:
Error: NameServerHosts Delete (Nameserver deletion failed at registry: 420
Object association prohibits
Oh yes, I have got it. Thanks.
--- On Wed, 13/5/09, Stephane Bortzmeyer bortzme...@nic.fr wrote:
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer bortzme...@nic.fr
Subject: Re: glue record
To: Tech W. tech...@yahoo.com.cn
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer bortzme...@nic.fr, bind-users@lists.isc.org
Received: Wednesday, 13
Your domain is still broken. You need to remove the NS record for your
internal host.
$ dig @dns2.gdpu.cn gdpu.cn ns
;; ANSWER SECTION:
gdpu.cn.3600IN NS dns1.gdpu.cn.
gdpu.cn.3600IN NS dns2.gdpu.cn.
gdpu.cn.3600IN
--- On Wed, 13/5/09, Kal Feher kalman.fe...@melbourneit.com.au wrote:
From: Kal Feher kalman.fe...@melbourneit.com.au
Subject: Re: glue record
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Received: Wednesday, 13 May, 2009, 5:34 PM
Your domain is still broken. You need
to remove the NS record for your
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 09:04:07PM +0800,
Tech W. tech...@yahoo.com.cn wrote
a message of 13 lines which said:
Remove the allow-update directive.
But she is running the windows DNS server not Bind..
Then it is probably off-topic for this list.
In message 809645.28773...@web15601.mail.cnb.yahoo.com, Tech W. writes:
Hello,
I have a bind host installed. It has two public IP addresses.
I want to give two NS records for my domain, each NS take each of the IP set
in the host.
more details, the host has two IPs:
61.145.121.59
In article guel1o$2ds...@sf1.isc.org,
Bradley Giesbrecht b...@pixilla.com wrote:
On May 13, 2009, at 6:51 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 09:02:55PM +0800,
Tech W. tech...@yahoo.com.cn wrote
a message of 34 lines which said:
I want to give two NS records for
It is network redundancy only in so far the DOS attack doesn't cause
your CPU and memory to get slammed.
If you're doing redundancy you really ought to do the whole thing by
getting another server and putting IT on the other network. Then you
don't have a single point of failure (unless
On May 13, 2009, at 7:29 AM, Jeff Lightner wrote:
It is network redundancy only in so far the DOS attack doesn't cause
your CPU and memory to get slammed.
I would block the block the ip under attack upstream so no cpu or
memory issues.
I didn't claim anything other then there can be in
Thanks, but that is not my problem.
the error message you are getting at leasts give a hint:
Mar 19 11:53:23 new named[28753]: client 172.20.210.4#38722: view
default4: updating zone 'fred.com/IN': RRSIG/NSEC update failed: sign
failure
My error says:
13-May-2009 22:04:59.662 client
Luke Hopkins wrote:
I have a glue (nameserver host) record which hasn't been used in years and I
want to delete it (and ultimately re-use the name). Attempting a delete through
UKreg (Fasthosts) gives me this:
Error: NameServerHosts Delete (Nameserver deletion failed at registry: 420
Object
Jeff, my apologies. I read the quoting levels wrong.
On May 13, 2009, at 8:01 AM, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
On May 13, 2009, at 7:29 AM, Jeff Lightner wrote:
It is network redundancy only in so far the DOS attack doesn't cause
your CPU and memory to get slammed.
I would block the block
No worries. Compared to some posts directed my way in various forums
(even this list) this was mild and I just wanted to set the record
straight.
In one list I'm on this kind of response would immediately result in a 3
day thread about why top posting (or bottom posting or in line posting
or
22 matches
Mail list logo
