Re: rbldnsd and DNSSEC compatibility issues - any suggestions?

2020-09-10 Thread Jim Popovitch via bind-users
On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 13:50 -0400, Jim Popovitch via bind-users wrote: > On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 11:56 -0400, Rob McEwen wrote: > > I manage an anti-spam DNSBL and I've been running into an issue in recent > > years - that I'm FINALLY getting around to asking about. I just joined this > > list to

Re: rbldnsd and DNSSEC compatibility issues - any suggestions?

2020-09-10 Thread Jim Popovitch via bind-users
On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 11:56 -0400, Rob McEwen wrote: > I manage an anti-spam DNSBL and I've been running into an issue in recent > years - that I'm FINALLY getting around to asking about. I just joined this > list to ask this question. Also, I checked the archives, but couldn't find an > answer

Re: Do not cache certain domains

2020-09-10 Thread tale via bind-users
On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 6:01 PM Ben Lavender wrote: > Without having to alter the TTL of the existing RRs as well as the > default TTL. I know this can be done using cache-max-ttl to limit the > whole cache, but can this be done for say one single or multiple defined > domains only? AFAIK there's

rbldnsd and DNSSEC compatibility issues - any suggestions?

2020-09-10 Thread Rob McEwen
I manage an anti-spam DNSBL and I've been running into an issue in recent years - that I'm FINALLY getting around to asking about. I just joined this list to ask this question. Also, I checked the archives, but couldn't find an answer - at least, not one I understood. So basically, while most

GeoIP Implement log help

2020-09-10 Thread ShubhamGoyal
> Dear sir, >We are running a public DNS resolver in > Centos 8 with bind software . We enable geoip feature at configuration time > now I want to know about > > " How can we implement Geo > log in bind

Re: Do not cache certain domains

2020-09-10 Thread Ben Lavender
Thanks, yes the second is actually the aim. We don't have secondaries since we use ADDS and BIND simply acts as a recursive service for the other internal domains. On 10/09/2020 16:01, Carl Byington wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 15:35 +0100, Ben

Re: rbldnsd and DNSSEC compatibility issues - any suggestions?

2020-09-10 Thread Mark Andrews
.local is for mDNS (RFC 6762). Do not use it for other purposes as you are hijacking the namespace. The best solution is to NOT change the name of the zones from those that you use publicly. That way they have the correct DNSSEC chain of trust down from the root. If you want to use

Re: rbldnsd and DNSSEC compatibility issues - any suggestions?

2020-09-10 Thread Rob McEwen
Mark, Most invaluement subscribers do direct queries - to hostnames that end with my own valid domain names that don't have this DNSSEC issue - those are the ONE ones that make use of public DNS and are broadcast across the internet. Our usage of ".local" zones for those who are RSYNC'ing

Re: rbldnsd and DNSSEC compatibility issues - any suggestions?

2020-09-10 Thread Mark Andrews
> On 11 Sep 2020, at 11:13, Rob McEwen wrote: > > Mark, > > Most invaluement subscribers do direct queries - to hostnames that end with > my own valid domain names that don't have this DNSSEC issue - those are the > ONE ones that make use of public DNS and are broadcast across the internet.

Re: rbldnsd and DNSSEC compatibility issues - any suggestions?

2020-09-10 Thread Mark Andrews
> On 11 Sep 2020, at 15:04, Rob McEwen wrote: > > Mark, > > The whole usage of DNS by the anti-spam industry in our DNSBLs - is somewhat > a hack on the DNS system from the start - I guess if you think that is wrong, > maybe you should take that up with Paul Vixie? And Paul will tell you

Re: GeoIP Implement log help

2020-09-10 Thread Swapneel Patnekar
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 8:58 AM ShubhamGoyal wrote: > Dear sir, >We are running a public DNS resolver in > Centos 8 with bind software . We enable geoip feature at configuration time > now I want to know about > >

Re: rbldnsd and DNSSEC compatibility issues - any suggestions?

2020-09-10 Thread Rob McEwen
Mark, The whole usage of DNS by the anti-spam industry in our DNSBLs - is somewhat a hack on the DNS system from the start - I guess if you think that is wrong, maybe you should take that up with Paul Vixie? And the whole purpose for MANY of us DNSBLs using ".local" in the first place - was

Re: rbldnsd and DNSSEC compatibility issues - any suggestions?

2020-09-10 Thread Rob McEwen
Mark, You gave me the "let them eat cake" answer I anticipated. Also, this isn't fixing a problem that my services produce - it is preventing a problem that a potential MISTAKE from a large customer would cause - the type of mistake that is inevitable at some point, but likely short-lived.

Re: Do not cache certain domains

2020-09-10 Thread Carl Byington via bind-users
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Thu, 2020-09-10 at 15:35 +0100, Ben Lavender wrote: > Anyone think they may know the answer to this? With the cooperation of the "certain domains" master servers, just slave the zones. The masters should be configured to send you notify messages

Re: Do not cache certain domains

2020-09-10 Thread Ben Lavender
Anyone think they may know the answer to this? Thanks Ben On 07/09/2020 23:00, Ben Lavender wrote: Hi, Without having to alter the TTL of the existing RRs as well as the default TTL. I know this can be done using cache-max-ttl to limit the whole cache, but can this be done for say one