Thanks
Its working now
Regards
Vivek Aggarwal
+973-36583058
-Original Message-
From: Alans [mailto:batpowe...@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 8:38 AM
To: Agarwal Vivek-RNGB36
Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: RE: How See what is Cached?
You should create the file
Hello.
powerdns-recursor - the best. :)) Over 20k req/sec - feel good.
As variant try to use small TTL like:
bind:
max-ncache-ttl 1;
max-cache-ttl 1;
powerdns-recursor
cache-ttl=1
default-ttl=1
Scott Haneda wrote:
Hello, this may not entirely be related to BIND/named, though I believe
it
On Jul 14 2009, Mark Elkins wrote:
On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 17:50 +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message 1247555725.13064.4.ca...@ilinux, Mark Elkins writes:
OK - so I accept that the algorithm will change.
What about some sort of validation of the base-64 part of the key?
Is there a
I've frequently run into a problem that the stub resolver just isn't
very dynamic in its selection of name servers - especially when dealing
with time-sensitive apps. If the first DNS server in the list is down,
the applications may slow down due to the constant retransmits. Given a
resolv.conf
I should mention, that I've looked at options rotate, but the concern is that
this will mean retransmits if ANY of the nameservers are down. So, any DNS
outage would cause some level of impact to the application.
It also makes it harder for applications to determine if slowdowns are due to
On Jul 15 2009, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message prayer.1.3.1.0907141701530.27...@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk,
Chris Thompson writes:
In BIND 9.6.0 one could take an unsigned zone and add an initial
KSK and ZSK to it using nsupdate (and if the right files were in the
key directory, it would sign
We had an incident last night on the authoritative nameserver which
is master for dnssec-test.csi.cam.ac.uk (a signed zone). At the time
it was running BIND 9.6.1rc1 (but I doubt if 9.6.1 is going to make
a difference). A script-generated update timed out, and it subsequently
failed to respond to
On Jul 15, 2009, at 12:29 PM, Dave Sparro wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote:
... However, I would like to just get DNS response times.
Perhaps take the list of hosts and feed them to a iterative script
calling dig, and fish out the response time? This does add the
problem of redirects of course
BIND-9.5.1-P1.
When ixfr-from-differences yes; is configured on a zone, and an edit
is made to the zone file and the zone reloaded via rndc reload
foo.com a journal file is not created. However, when an rndc
reload of the whole configuration is done, then the journal is
created. Is this
Scott Haneda wrote:
On Jul 15, 2009, at 12:29 PM, Dave Sparro wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote:
... However, I would like to just get DNS response times.
Perhaps take the list of hosts and feed them to a iterative script
calling dig, and fish out the response time? This does add the
problem of
On Jul 15, 2009, at 12:59 PM, Dave Sparro wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote:
On Jul 15, 2009, at 12:29 PM, Dave Sparro wrote:
Scott Haneda wrote:
... However, I would like to just get DNS response times.
Perhaps take the list of hosts and feed them to a iterative
script calling dig, and fish out
BIND-9.5.1-P1.
When ixfr-from-differences yes; is configured on a zone, and an edit
is made to the zone file and the zone reloaded via rndc reload
foo.com a journal file is not created. However, when an rndc
reload of the whole configuration is done, then the journal is
created. Is this
In message 4a5e300c.7050...@gmail.com, Dave Sparro writes:
--===2296683873387296090==
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN
html
head
meta content=text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1
Chris Buxton wrote:
On Jun 30, 2009, at 6:15 AM, bind9 wrote:
1) skipping zone transfer as master 213.173.250.146#53 (source
0.0.0.0#0) is unreachable
(cached) seem to indicate that the slave has cached a knowledge about
the master being
unreachable. It isn't. I can nslookup on the master
Besides TSIG key, I want to limit the source address also. That's to
say, I want the given address with specified key to execute the update
only.
How can I do it? Is this syntax correct?
allow-update {key mykey; 192.168.1.254;};
Alas, no. What you want is:
allow-update { !{
hi,
I am trying to setup BIND9 as a DNS server for local IPv6 name resolution
within a LAN. I've been reading through related threads on forums and whatever
documents Google comes up with. I am new to this and haven't been able to get
it to work so far and could really use some help.
heres
16 matches
Mail list logo
