Re: Nsupdate -l not using session.key

2010-07-01 Thread Kalman Feher
I was obviously especially tired yesterday when I tested this. Anyway BIND was chroot'd and user wasn't. (slaps forehead) Problem solved. On 30/06/10 6:07 PM, "Kal Feher" wrote: > > > > On 30/06/10 5:25 PM, "Alan Clegg" wrote: > >> On 6/30/2010 11:13 AM, Kalman Feher wrote: >>> While t

Re: Nsupdate -l not using session.key

2010-06-30 Thread Kalman Feher
On 30/06/10 5:25 PM, "Alan Clegg" wrote: > On 6/30/2010 11:13 AM, Kalman Feher wrote: >> While testing bind 9.7.1 features including automated signing and >> update-policy local. I encountered some strange behaviour using nsupdate -l. >> >> When using nsupdate -l I was not able to update the

Re: Nsupdate -l not using session.key

2010-06-30 Thread Alan Clegg
On 6/30/2010 11:13 AM, Kalman Feher wrote: > While testing bind 9.7.1 features including automated signing and > update-policy local. I encountered some strange behaviour using nsupdate -l. > > When using nsupdate -l I was not able to update the zone in question and the > following error was gener

Nsupdate -l not using session.key

2010-06-30 Thread Kalman Feher
While testing bind 9.7.1 features including automated signing and update-policy local. I encountered some strange behaviour using nsupdate -l. When using nsupdate -l I was not able to update the zone in question and the following error was generated: update-security: error: client 127.0.0.1#9292: