On Dec 18, 2009, at 12:33 PM, Len Conrad wrote:
> bind 9.6.1-P1
>
> named-checkconf /etc/namedb/named.conf
> ... ok
>
> (in global options)
>
> options {
> allow-recursion { mynets; };
> blackhole { !mynets; };
> };
I could be wrong, but wouldn't that be:
blackhole
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Len Conrad wrote:
> dig'ging from a !mynets IP receives a referral to rather than
> time-out/silence.
Please show us. Does dig and tcpdump (or other packet trace) show where
the response actually comes from?
___
bind-users mailing
bind 9.6.1-P1
named-checkconf /etc/namedb/named.conf
... ok
(in global options)
options {
allow-recursion { mynets; };
blackhole { !mynets; };
};
dig'ging from a !mynets IP receives a referral to rather than time-out/silence.
dig'ging from a mynets IP receives an answer.
On Dec 18 2009, Alan Clegg wrote:
Niobos wrote:
On 17 Dec 2009, at 20:50, Kevin Darcy wrote:
Cat'ing the zone file is no longer reliable once you've enabled a
zone for Dynamic Update. There might be updates in the log file
which haven't been committed to the actual zone file yet. That's
why I
Niobos wrote:
On 17 Dec 2009, at 20:50, Kevin Darcy wrote:
Cat'ing the zone file is no longer reliable once you've enabled a
zone for Dynamic Update. There might be updates in the log file
which haven't been committed to the actual zone file yet. That's
why I recommended that you use an AXFR of
On 17 Dec 2009, at 20:50, Kevin Darcy wrote:
> Cat'ing the zone file is no longer reliable once you've enabled a zone for
> Dynamic Update. There might be updates in the log file which haven't been
> committed to the actual zone file yet. That's why I recommended that you use
> an AXFR of the zo
6 matches
Mail list logo
