> Why are you going through all of these gyrations? The forwarding algorithm
> in BIND has for a long time been based on RTT, so if one forwarder, or a set
> of forwarders, stops working, the other(s) will be used automatically. In
> other words, forwarder failover works without any special configu
>> When I query a name, the dns-cache queries forwarders for gTLDs
>> instead of using local hint file, why?
>
> local "hint" file? I'm not sure what you mean here.
This file just replace the original root-servers with all my 4
recursive DNS's domain name and IP, nothing other.
>>
>> And the dns-
Hi there,
I have a potentially BIND related problem and I'm positively stuck. I've
posted this question on Server Fault
(http://serverfault.com/questions/306997/cant-seem-to-resolve-domain-but-can-dig-it)
with little exposure. The jist of it is:
My name server (24.222.7.12) refuses to resolv
On 9/21/2011 7:33 AM, Drunkard Zhang wrote:
2011/9/20 Drunkard Zhang:
I got 4 DNSs doing recursive resolution, which splited into 2 groups,
and a couple of dns caches. Each group of recursion DNS using their
own net link, which is different.
Here's problem: I want a dns-cache to use one group o
On 21/09/11 17:30, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> Are you running the "Undelegated domain test" or just the default
> "Domain test"? Only the
> "Undelegated domain test" is showing the error. It is still reporting it now.
This is pretty-well way out of scope for "bind-users" by now.
Thank
On 9/20/2011 5:08 AM, Drunkard Zhang wrote:
I got 4 DNSs doing recursive resolution, which splited into 2 groups,
and a couple of dns caches. Each group of recursion DNS using their
own net link, which is different.
Here's problem: I want a dns-cache to use one group of recursion DNS
as their
On 9/21/2011 5:00 PM, TMK wrote:
I have couple of questions.
bind cache memory limit is 4GB. can I increase it. or this is hard-coded limit.
i'm running the x64 bit version.
You can _try_ to raise that limit above 4Gb (see the various
configuration elements under "Operating System Resource Lim
I have couple of questions.
bind cache memory limit is 4GB. can I increase it. or this is hard-coded limit.
i'm running the x64 bit version.
also to increase the cache hit ratio I have created script to query my
dns for the top 1 million sites. would this give any performance
advantages or is it
One thing we do is create a single "alias" zone with generic information in it
to have multiple zones all go to the same IP.
Typically the main zone we'll put in its own zone file and have named.conf
associate that zone with that zone file.
For other zones we tell named.conf to point to the ali
On Sep 21, 2011, at 3:56 PM, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is it possible to have one IP in multiple zone files for forward lookups?
Yup, happens all the time:
example.com:
www.example.com. 600 IN A 192.0.2.1
example.net:
www.example.net. 600 IN A 192.0.2.1
foo:
www.foo.com
On Sep 21, 2011, at 12:56 PM, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote:
> Is it possible to have one IP in multiple zone files for forward lookups?
Yes.
> What type of troubles would be encountered?
None. This sort of thing is very commonly done, for example with
shared/virtual webservers.
Regards
--
-Chuck
What I am looking at doing is the following.
www.existingdomain.edu 86400 A 192.0.0.1
www.existingdomain.newdomain.edu 86400 A 192.0.0.1
Larry
> -Original Message-
> From: Warren Kumari [mailto:war...@kumari.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 15:18
> To: Adamiec, Lawrence
> Cc
Adamiec, Lawrence wrote:
> Is it possible to have one IP in multiple zone files for forward
> lookups? What type of troubles would be encountered?
Like, having www.example.com and ftp.example.org point to the same IP
address?
Yes, it's nothing weird about it.
Regards
Eivind Olsen
___
Yes, and none. FYI, traditionally PTR records contain only one hostname.
Doug
On 09/21/2011 12:56, Adamiec, Lawrence wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Is it possible to have one IP in multiple zone files for forward
> lookups? What type of troubles would be encountered?
>
>
>
> Larry
>
>
>
> La
Hi,
Is it possible to have one IP in multiple zone files for forward
lookups? What type of troubles would be encountered?
Larry
Lawrence Adamiec
Unix Manager/Web Support Specialist
Center for Law and Computers
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Illinois Institute of Technology
Room 525B
I was the one asking about water.com. I'd started a separate thread hoping not
to tromp on the OP of the earlier thread but apparently didn't succeed.
I know the reason for the SOA/MX report so never asked about that.
I did ask about the delegation messages but at this point as noted earlier I'
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 2:25 AM, Niall O'Reilly wrote:
>
> On 21 Sep 2011, at 02:08, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>
>> dig confirms that .com had the glue for water.com.
>
> As does dnscheck.iis.se.
> Indeed, none of the test history (5 tests, today and yasterday)
> archived for water
I think it is safe to say the issue is the iis.se site is broken so far as
delegation test goes. Another user reported to me that he had several domains
return the same thing at this site.
Thanks everyone for the replies.
-Original Message-
From: bind-users-bounces+jlightner=water
2011/9/20 Drunkard Zhang :
I got 4 DNSs doing recursive resolution, which splited into 2 groups,
and a couple of dns caches. Each group of recursion DNS using their
own net link, which is different.
Here's problem: I want a dns-cache to use one group of recursion DNS
as their forwarders, and use
2011/9/20 Drunkard Zhang :
> I got 4 DNSs doing recursive resolution, which splited into 2 groups,
> and a couple of dns caches. Each group of recursion DNS using their
> own net link, which is different.
>
> Here's problem: I want a dns-cache to use one group of recursion DNS
> as their forwarders
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 02:55:08AM +0200,
Yanek wrote
1/ What is the bind record format for the zone itself?
On 21.09.11 08:44, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
Strictly speaking, it is not the BIND format but the standard format
(RFC 1035, section 5). However, not all name servers follow it
(stand
On 21 Sep 2011, at 02:08, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> dig confirms that .com had the glue for water.com.
As does dnscheck.iis.se.
Indeed, none of the test history (5 tests, today and yasterday)
archived for water.com at this site shows any delegation problem.
Only a w
22 matches
Mail list logo
