Hi,
for the list archive, here's how I solved my "problem".
Some on the thread tell me to run BIND on the 1rst VPS, as DNS
autoritative server and as caching resolver who let only hosts from my
network send him queries.
Well I'm quite happy my setup with NSD as DNS autorit
rsive dns-server there, and point it whereever?
As far as I can tell, that'd solve everything, add caching, and let it all be
controlled from the config of the DNS-server?
Terje
Hi,
I guess this is the way that'll end.
Laurent SALIN
You'll need to setup your bind.conf;
z
On Sep 28, 2013, at 2:24 PM, Laurent SALIN wrote:
> Le 28.09.2013 21:28, Mike. a écrit :
>> The way I solved this problem on my setup, I assigned another IP
>> address to the network interface via ifconfig alias.
>>
>> I put the authoritative namesever on one IP address, and the
>> recursive nam
Le 28.09.2013 21:28, Mike. a écrit :
> The way I solved this problem on my setup, I assigned another IP
> address to the network interface via ifconfig alias.
>
> I put the authoritative namesever on one IP address, and the
> recursive nameserver on the other IP address.
>
> They both are still l
On 9/28/2013 at 7:16 PM Laurent SALIN wrote:
|Le 28.09.2013 18:32, Terje Elde a écrit :
|> Not sure if I misunderstood what you're trying to do, but the way
I
|recall it, you have two boxes, one running with one recursive and
one
|authoritative nameserver, and you wanted a second box to quey the
Le 28.09.2013 18:32, Terje Elde a écrit :
> Not sure if I misunderstood what you're trying to do, but the way I recall
> it, you have two boxes, one running with one recursive and one authoritative
> nameserver, and you wanted a second box to quey the recursive nameserver on
> the first box, whi
On 28. sep. 2013, at 15:50, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
> Given that BIND can happily listen on ports other than 53 and OpenBSD allows
> a port to be specified against each nameserver in resolv.conf, it does not
> seem an unreasonable question to me.
Just to avoid any misunderstanding...
Not sure
of an explanation as to /why/ it's not easy to do what asked in
the original reasonable-sounding question.
Beg to differ. The question isn't reasonable. There's no point in
having a dns recursive resolver listening on a port other than the one
that clients will contact it on.
Fa
my own libc just for DNS queries :-)
Laurent SALIN
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Le 27.09.2013 23:31, jb a écrit :
> Well, I hope I understand you.
> You use DNS Proxy server, like BIND or DNSMASQ.
hi,
actually I use two daemons,
one to serve as a autoritative DNS server : nsd
the other one to serve as a recursive DNS resolver with caching : unbound
I can't se
solv/res_init.c. All you need to do(!) is change this to a value
>> of your choice and recompile libc
>
> Sorry, but this is startin to look a lot like a complicated solution to a
> problem that isn't really there...
>
> Why not just point from resolv.conf to local
problem that isn't really there...
>>
> It was more of an explanation as to /why/ it's not easy to do what asked in
> the original reasonable-sounding question.
Beg to differ. The question isn't reasonable. There's no point in
having a dns recursive resolver li
On 27/09/2013 23:08, Terje Elde wrote:
On 28. sep. 2013, at 00:03, Frank Leonhardt wrote:
If I understand the way it works correctly, the resolver pulls a list of the NS
and hard-sets the port number for each to 53 (via a manifest constant) . See
libc/resolv/res_init.c. All you need to do(!)
lue
> of your choice and recompile libc
Sorry, but this is startin to look a lot like a complicated solution to a
problem that isn't really there...
Why not just point from resolv.conf to localhost, run a caching and/or
recursive dns-server there, and point it whereever?
As far as I can t
On 27/09/2013 19:20, Laurent SALIN wrote:
Hello,
I wondering how i can send queries to a dns resolver listening on a
different port than the normaly 53 tcp/udp ?
The situation:
I've got a vps who running NSD as a autoritative nameserver, listening
on tcp/udp 53 and unbound as personnal res
Laurent SALIN laposte.net> writes:
>
> Hello,
> I wondering how i can send queries to a dns resolver listening on a
> different port than the normaly 53 tcp/udp ?
>
> The situation:
> I've got a vps who running NSD as a autoritative nameserver, listening
&
Is there any way to use multiple IPs?
hi,
no I can't. Each VPS got only one IPv4 and I'm really not aware yet
about how IPv6 works.
Laurent SALIN
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questi
Le 27/09/2013 22:28, Terje Elde a écrit :
Why is that a "bad" solution?
You'd cache locally, which is often considered a good thing?
Granted, it's a bit of a weird setup, but still.
I hope it could be esay as put the ip of my "resolver VPS" in the
/etc/resolv.conf and let PF translate the de
On 27. sep. 2013, at 20:20, Laurent SALIN wrote:
> I've got a "bad" solution, use unbound on the second VPS and maybe tell
> him to ask the 1rst VPS on the unusual tcp/udp port
Why is that a "bad" solution?
You'd cache locally, which is often considered a good thing?
Granted, it's a bit of a w
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013, at 13:20, Laurent SALIN wrote:
> Hello,
> I wondering how i can send queries to a dns resolver listening on a
> different port than the normaly 53 tcp/udp ?
>
> The situation:
> I've got a vps who running NSD as a autoritative nameserver, listen
Hello,
I wondering how i can send queries to a dns resolver listening on a
different port than the normaly 53 tcp/udp ?
The situation:
I've got a vps who running NSD as a autoritative nameserver, listening
on tcp/udp 53 and unbound as personnal resolver, listening on a
different tcp/udp por
Hi all,
I'm running FreeBSD 9.2 with squid for a friend who owns an ISP outside the
U.S and uses my FreeBSD squid proxy to access netflix. I've been told this
can be also accomplished via DNS Proxy. Is it true?
If yes which one do you recommend
On 3 June 2013, at 22:21, Doug Hardie wrote:
>
> On 3 June 2013, at 20:39, staticsafe wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 07:57:07PM -0700, Doug Hardie wrote:
>>> I have an unusual situation. A program is doing a DNS lookup and often the
>>> IP address
On Mon, 03 Jun 2013 21:57:07 -0500, Doug Hardie wrote:
I have an unusual situation. A program is doing a DNS lookup and often
the IP address has no reverse DNS entries. As a result the program
hangs for several timeouts. The call is not being made directly in its
code, but is occurring
On 4 June 2013, at 22:19, Enno Davids wrote:
> See if whois can tell you who owns the block the IP is in. That may give
> you some insight into what is asking for the reverse.
Its AT&T. Its probably at least a state's worth of DSL addresses. I am
physically at one of them for a couple more d
See if whois can tell you who owns the block the IP is in. That may give
you some insight into what is asking for the reverse.
E.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, s
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Doug Hardie wrote:
> Unfortunately truss does not show anything more than ktrace.
Normally most people use truss first, then fall back to ktrace ;)
> Bind doesn't check the hosts files as far as I can tell.
System requests obey nsswitch.conf(5)
--
Adam Vande Mo
On Jun 3, 2013 10:22 PM, "Doug Hardie" wrote:
>
>
> On 3 June 2013, at 20:39, staticsafe wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 07:57:07PM -0700, Doug Hardie wrote:
> >> I have an unusual situation. A program is doing a DNS lookup and
often the IP address has
On 3 June 2013, at 20:39, staticsafe wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 07:57:07PM -0700, Doug Hardie wrote:
>> I have an unusual situation. A program is doing a DNS lookup and often the
>> IP address has no reverse DNS entries. As a result the program hangs for
>> severa
On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 07:57:07PM -0700, Doug Hardie wrote:
> I have an unusual situation. A program is doing a DNS lookup and often the
> IP address has no reverse DNS entries. As a result the program hangs for
> several timeouts. The call is not being made directly in its cod
I have an unusual situation. A program is doing a DNS lookup and often the IP
address has no reverse DNS entries. As a result the program hangs for several
timeouts. The call is not being made directly in its code, but is occurring in
a system call. There are no specific calls to DNS, its
My DNS config is pretty generic. I did try putting in the options to stop
recursive lookups, but all that did was cause even more failures (permission
denied lookups, etc...), so I removed that.
Here's my basic config;
options {
directory "/etc/namedb";
Okay, what's your DNS setup? Are you running a recursive cache that
contacts the root servers directly? Using your ISP's servers? Etc.
As a mitigation step, I tried pointing my caches to 8.8.8.8 and
8.8.4.4. - but it turns out that Google is intentionally blocking
(returning NX re
Well I tried changing them to various numbers up to 180 from 1 and 5
respectively and that didn't help.
Anyone else get around all this DNS mess with timeouts? It's causing my mail
server to throw errors; host lookup did not complete and not deliver mail.
-Original Message
net.inet.ip.fw.dyn_short_lifetime ?
net.inet.ip.fw.dyn_udp_lifetime ?
You might want to increase these, given the current state of things...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To uns
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Michael Powell wrote:
> I'm probably not smart enough to be able to help directly with your problem
> but I'd like to add that there is a snowballing DNS Amplification ddos
> attack against SpamHaus going on which is spilling over
Yes, thi
l just recently. I've checked my interface stats to make sure
> there aren't a bunch of fragmented packets or errors, and there aren't. I'm
> not running NAT, it's a publically accessible IP address.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Sierchio [mailto:ku...@tene
Don O'Neil wrote:
> Hi everyone. recently my server started having issues with DNS and FTP
> sessions either not resolving or timing out. I've tracked the issue down
> to IPFW. if I issue a 'sysctl net.inet.ip.fw.enable=0' then my issues go
> away.
>
[snip]
gmented packets or errors, and there aren't. I'm
not running NAT, it's a publically accessible IP address.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Sierchio [mailto:ku...@tenebras.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2013 8:58 PM
To: Don O'Neil
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:
27;Neil wrote:
> Hi everyone. recently my server started having issues with DNS and FTP
> sessions either not resolving or timing out. I've tracked the issue down to
> IPFW. if I issue a 'sysctl net.inet.ip.fw.enable=0' then my issues go away.
>
>
>
> I have the bas
Hi everyone. recently my server started having issues with DNS and FTP
sessions either not resolving or timing out. I've tracked the issue down to
IPFW. if I issue a 'sysctl net.inet.ip.fw.enable=0' then my issues go away.
I have the basic rules like this for dns;
01160 all
Hi everyone. recently my server started having issues with DNS and FTP
sessions either not resolving or timing out. I've tracked the issue down to
IPFW. if I issue a 'sysctl net.inet.ip.fw.enable=0' then my issues go away.
I have the basic rules like this for dns;
01160 all
rver at your ISP side.
# So DO NOT set MTU explicitly.
set authname
set authkey
set dial
set login
add default HISADDR
enable dns
# a must, if DHCP server is enabled in adsl modem
# and if you don't wanna edit /etc/resolv.conf
# each time before connecting tp ISP's ppp
.
> I still don' get why FreeBSD is having trouble
> connecting via PPP.
The original problem you quoted was with DNS and
that's explained by the DHCP on fxp0 overwriting resolv.conf with the
router/modem's own non-functional DNS proxy.
As regards ppp.conf mine was simply:
al"
> ppp_nat="NO"
> ppp_profile="adsl"
> ppp_adsl_unit="0"
I've also not used the last parameter. The tun0 interface would
have been generated automatically.
Everything implies that the _kernel_ has all the neccessary
functionality enabled (tun inte
="NO"
ppp_profile="adsl"
ppp_adsl_unit="0"
I tried to specify tun0 interface explicitly,
but still no luck.
When I start ppp using:
service ppp start
It shows tun0 is busy.
--
## etc/resolv.conf
#Open DNS nameservers:
nameserver 208.67.
he underlying ethernet device if you want to route back-out
> into the router's LAN (PPPoE and IP can share a lan).
>
> You don't necessarily need DHCP with PPPoE because PPP can deliver the
> IP address, DNS etc by itself. If the ISP requires you to use DHCP you
> should pr
nly need to
configure the underlying ethernet device if you want to route back-out
into the router's LAN (PPPoE and IP can share a lan).
You don't necessarily need DHCP with PPPoE because PPP can deliver the
IP address, DNS etc by itself. If the ISP requires you to use DHCP y
set authkey
set timeout 120
set redial 0 0
# set ifaddr 10.0.0.1/0 10.0.0.2/0 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.0
# now this interface is set up at 2nd line in adsl profile
add default HISADDR
enable dns
nat enable no
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Mark Blackman wrote:
>
> On 16 Oct 2012, at 16:38, Jack wrote:
>
>> I 'll try mpd5. Thanks.
>>
>> Actually, I was concerned with userland ppp, becoz of the
>> scenarios where we have a FreeBSD machine and the only
>> way to connect to internet is an adsl modem in
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 20:38:47 +0530, Jack wrote:
> I'm new as a FreeBSD user, and trying to configure my
> pppoe connection.
I've been using PPPoE with a DSL modem for many years, using
FreeBSD 4, 5 and 7 with the system's PPPoE tools. The IP
was provided to the computer directly, so no DHCP in the
adsl' is the profile name, in /etc/ppp/ppp.conf.
> I also tried
> #ppp -auto adsl
> but the error message was same.
>
> The tun0 interface is created, but when is tried pinging to well
> known sites, e.g. yahoo.com, etc. it says:
> "can't resolve hostname.&q
g to it. The FreeBSD box
then runs a DHCP server (dns/dnsmasq in ports) for any other machines
on my LAN to talk to.
> I'm pasting my related configuration files if they can help.
> Please tell me if any other files are needed.
Nothing really stands out glancing at your configs. I'
On 16 Oct 2012, at 16:49, Mark Blackman wrote:
>
> On 16 Oct 2012, at 16:38, Jack wrote:
>
>> I 'll try mpd5. Thanks.
>>
>> Actually, I was concerned with userland ppp, becoz of the
>> scenarios where we have a FreeBSD machine and the only
>> way to connect to internet is an adsl modem in br
On 16 Oct 2012, at 16:38, Jack wrote:
> I 'll try mpd5. Thanks.
>
> Actually, I was concerned with userland ppp, becoz of the
> scenarios where we have a FreeBSD machine and the only
> way to connect to internet is an adsl modem in bridge mode
> (assuming the mode in modem, can't be changed).
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Mark Blackman wrote:
>
> On 16 Oct 2012, at 16:08, Jack wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I'm new as a FreeBSD user, and trying to configure my
>> pppoe connection.
>
> [snip]
>
>>
>> fxp0 is the ethernet interface of my PC via which adsl modem is connected.
>>
>> Any suggesti
On 16 Oct 2012, at 16:08, Jack wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm new as a FreeBSD user, and trying to configure my
> pppoe connection.
[snip]
>
> fxp0 is the ethernet interface of my PC via which adsl modem is connected.
>
> Any suggestions ...
Consider using the ports mpd5 daemon for a PPPoE connectio
Hi
This morning at about 7 am, I noticed to commits to stable/9 that I wanted to
pull in and so did and then rebuilt from source.
Just now, I noticed this: svn commit: r240807 - in stable/9/contrib/bind9: .
lib/dns lib/dns/include/dns
I really can't be bother to requildworld again,
2 of them and one is configured to
point to SERVER A , and the other to SERVER B. Differenet places, same
configuration. Is there any preference over what is PRIMARY NAMESERVER or
SECONDARY NAMESERVER? I mean, Primary is the one used mainly?
actually when another DNS server resolve the name i
>> b) I am looking for good list like this one for people developing,
>> learning about Android Development. Any suggestion ?
>> I am trying to setup a Freebsd machine for developing for Android, if
>> possible.
>
> Hmm. http://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html suggests that maybe the
> Linux d
ason I have 2 of them and one is configured to point to SERVER
> A , and the other to SERVER B. Differenet places, same configuration. Is
> there any preference over what is PRIMARY NAMESERVER or SECONDARY NAMESERVER?
> I mean, Primary is the one used mainly?
No, DNS round-robin use
Hello.
I am sorry if the following 2 questions could sound too stupid.
a) Normally any Domain name registered has to have 2 Nameservers.
Some registry like the one responsible for .ORG requires 2 at least
to propagate the domain. In teh case of .COM that is not a
requirement, one nameserver c
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 10:58:39 -0500, Odhiambo Washington
wrote:
What does this "linking" look like?
Do you mean like symlinking zone files, so that domainA is exactly a
replica of domainB - as in "conjoined"?:)
precisely --
foo.com
foo.net -> foo.com
foo.org -> foo.com
foobar.net -> foo.co
On 04/06/2012 20:37, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 04/06/2012 14:47, Rada alive wrote:
>> [root@pladaks /usr/ports/dns/unbound]# make all-depends-list
>> /usr/ports/devel/gmake
>> /usr/ports/textproc/expat2
>> /usr/ports/dns/ldns
>> /usr/ports/devel/gettext
>>
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 04/06/2012 14:47, Rada alive wrote:
> > [root@pladaks /usr/ports/dns/unbound]# make all-depends-list
> > /usr/ports/devel/gmake
> > /usr/ports/textproc/expat2
> > /usr/ports/dns/ldns
> > /usr/ports/d
On 04/06/2012 14:47, Rada alive wrote:
> [root@pladaks /usr/ports/dns/unbound]# make all-depends-list
> /usr/ports/devel/gmake
> /usr/ports/textproc/expat2
> /usr/ports/dns/ldns
> /usr/ports/devel/gettext
> /usr/ports/devel/doxygen
> /usr/ports/devel/libtool
> /usr/ports/co
On Mon, 4 Jun 2012 15:47:29 +0200
Rada alive wrote:
> I was hoping to test dns/unbound as a lighter-weight DNS cache
> service to replace BIND. A few hours into "make install" i decided to
> abort and have a look at the dependencies.
> Can someone tell me why a DNS serv
Rada alive wrote:
> I was hoping to test dns/unbound as a lighter-weight DNS cache service to
> replace BIND. A few hours into "make install" i decided to abort and have
> a look at the dependencies.
> Can someone tell me why a DNS server needs packages like "graphics/
I was hoping to test dns/unbound as a lighter-weight DNS cache service to
replace BIND. A few hours into "make install" i decided to abort and have a
look at the dependencies.
Can someone tell me why a DNS server needs packages like "graphics/jpeg"
and "x11/randrproto&
anyone else notice this? Any word on what was causing it? I have
to admit, it was rather startling at first.
Do you have any further details? What are you using for DNS servers,
or are you doing lookups yourself?
Actually, around the same time others were reporting another site (not
fbsd, which I
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 11:36:28 -0700
Robert articulated:
> Let's just blame it on Bush! Everybody else does.
Unless you are a right wing fascist; i.e. Limbaugh or Hannity, then you
blame Obama or Clinton.
--
Jerry ♔
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 11:36:28 -0700
Robert wrote:
>
> Let's just blame it on Bush! Everybody else does.
Are you sure it wasn't the "evildoers"? You know, the "terrists"?
Maybe laying the groundwork for a "nucular" strike?
--
Conrad J. Sabatier
conr...@cox.net
___
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 09:39:32 -0500
"Conrad J. Sabatier" wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 12:16:25 +0100
> "Julian H. Stacey" wrote:
>
> > > No -- you were not imagining things. The DNS for freebsd.org was
> > > temporarily broken. It was that m
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 12:16:25 +0100
"Julian H. Stacey" wrote:
> > No -- you were not imagining things. The DNS for freebsd.org was
> > temporarily broken. It was that most impossible to remove of
> > causes: human error.
>
> Thats good, as it mean
Julian H. Stacey writes:
> > No -- you were not imagining things. The DNS for freebsd.org was
> > temporarily broken. It was that most impossible to remove of causes:
> > human error.
>
> Thats good, as it means not sun spots aka EMP aka gammma :-)
&q
> No -- you were not imagining things. The DNS for freebsd.org was
> temporarily broken. It was that most impossible to remove of causes:
> human error.
Thats good, as it means not sun spots aka EMP aka gammma :-)
Cheers,
Julian
--
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultan
okups.
>>> Did anyone else notice this? Any word on what was causing it? I have
>>> to admit, it was rather startling at first.
>> Do you have any further details? What are you using for DNS servers,
>> or are you doing lookups yourself?
> Actually, around the same
ailed hostname
> >> lookups.
> >>
> >> Did anyone else notice this? Any word on what was causing it? I
> >> have to admit, it was rather startling at first.
> >
> >
> > Do you have any further details? What are you using for DNS
> > s
Did anyone else notice this? Any word on what was causing it? I
> > have
> > to admit, it was rather startling at first.
>
>
> Do you have any further details? What are you using for DNS servers,
> or are you doing lookups yourself?
I run named on my box as a
to admit, it was rather startling at first.
Do you have any further details? What are you using for DNS servers,
or are you doing lookups yourself?
Actually, around the same time others were reporting another site (not
fbsd, which I could access easily) was broken. So maybe a dark cloud
passed
first.
Do you have any further details? What are you using for DNS servers, or
are you doing lookups yourself?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
Earlier today, for a period of about 30-45 minutes or so, any attempt to
connect to www.freebsd.org was yielding failed hostname lookups.
Did anyone else notice this? Any word on what was causing it? I have
to admit, it was rather startling at first.
--
Conrad J. Sabatier
conr...@cox.net
_
beneficial to retain the 'empty zones' that fall within those or are
> they redundant?
They are not redundant, and yes, they are still beneficial.
Doug
--
It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of k
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 at 01:14:47, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 02/18/2012 03:23, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
>>
>> On 2/18/12 12:57 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
>>>
>>> To clarify, almost universally the opposition to the idea centers
>>> around the problems of users who enable this method, and then don't
>>> noti
hich is why I weight this particular objection pretty
low. If you don't notice failed axfrs, you've already got deeper
problems. :)
To be fair however, there are a lot of people who believe (rightly or
wrongly) that resolving DNS should be a "fire and forget" service. Those
of u
On 2/18/12 12:57 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> To clarify, almost universally the opposition to the idea centers around
> the problems of users who enable this method, and then don't notice if
> something changes/breaks, resulting in a stale zone (or zones, depending
> on what you choose to slave).
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/17/2012 05:41, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
> Hello list, Jeremy, Doug,
>
>
> We're currently having a discussion on the FRnOG mailing list regarding
> the laughable announcement of an attack on the DNS root servers by
>
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 02:41:57PM +0100, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
> Hello list, Jeremy, Doug,
>
>
> We're currently having a discussion on the FRnOG mailing list regarding
> the laughable announcement of an attack on the DNS root servers by
> Anonymous.
>
> I'v
Hello list, Jeremy, Doug,
We're currently having a discussion on the FRnOG mailing list regarding
the laughable announcement of an attack on the DNS root servers by
Anonymous.
I've kinda hijacked the thread to ask whether people slave the root zone
or not, and why if not.
Act
>
> - with UseDNS no, I can login quickly again..
> - I don't manage the DNS servers, can do anything there, but I do believe
> they do not receive anything
> since I now see, I can't even ping any of the three of tehm, specified in
> my /etc/resolv,conf file
> # pi
On 1/19/12 3:32 PM, n dhert wrote:
> FreeBSD 8.2. system.
> Gets is TCP/IP parameters (and DNS name-servers IPs) from a DHCP server,
> with a fixed IP address
> (the system always gets the same IP, based on its MAC address as specified
> in the DHCP config file)
>
> Now I
FreeBSD 8.2. system.
Gets is TCP/IP parameters (and DNS name-servers IPs) from a DHCP server,
with a fixed IP address
(the system always gets the same IP, based on its MAC address as specified
in the DHCP config file)
Now I wanted the system to have a different IP address.
Changed the DHCP server
On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 11:06:39AM -0800, Waitman Gobble wrote:
> Hello,
>
> You /can/ have a nameserver with same IP as www. And you /can/ multihome
> your NIC with multiple IP on same machine,
>
> ie,
> www.example.com 192.168.0.131 and 192.168.0.132 (if you want, optional
> extra address for w
Now after refreshing my memory (it happened one year ago) I
> could remember that I did register the nameservers. I found the
> option in my registar to add to some domain i.e. mydomain.com
> the entries ns1.mydomain.com, etc. I think that the problem I
> had was related with the IPs. The VPS p
On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 04:26:38PM -0800, Waitman Gobble wrote:
> Yes, you can run BIND on the same FreeBSD machine as your web server.
> You have to have your nameserver listed with internic (for .com and .net -
> ie, your nameserver has to show up in the NAMESERVER whois (note: different
> than D
On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 04:26:38PM -0800, Waitman Gobble wrote:
> You have to have your nameserver listed with internic (for .com and .net -
> ie, your nameserver has to show up in the NAMESERVER whois (note: different
> than DOMAIN whois) on http://www.internic.net/whois.html) and also for each
T
Kevin Zheng writes:
> FreeBSD comes with a name server already installed; you don't
> need to get it from the ports, although I'm not sure what
> difference it makes.
The version in ports is a later issue in te BIND 9.* series.
If the difference is important to you, you probably aren'
Hello,
I've been using FreeBSD as a local nameserver (with my own .local
domains!) for quite some time. FreeBSD comes with a name server already
installed; you don't need to get it from the ports, although I'm not
sure what difference it makes. The one that comes with FreeBSD can be
enabled with n
Walter Alejandro Iglesias writes:
> Perhaps you find stupid my question, but believe me, I am
> lost :-).
Where you are now, so once were most of us. :-)
> Sure, like you say, it is possible "running" BIND and Apache.
> But, is it possible|convenient that the name server "reside" i
believe me, I
> am lost :-).
>
> Or to simplify the question, what is needed to run a DNS?
> What I know:
>
> Edit the zone files.
> Run bind.
> Register the names ns1.mysite.com, ns2..., (some trick here?)
> Obviously adding them to the registrar of the domains served.
>
1 - 100 of 1459 matches
Mail list logo
