Great: I just noticed that installing knot-dnsutils uninstalls dnsutils.
Is kdig completely backwards-compatible to dig?
Klaus
Am 08.06.2018 um 16:20 schrieb Daniel Salzman:
> kdig notify example.com +tcp
>
>
> On 06/08/2018 04:18 PM, Klaus Darilion wrote:
>> btw: does anybody knows a tool for
kdig notify example.com +tcp
On 06/08/2018 04:18 PM, Klaus Darilion wrote:
> btw: does anybody knows a tool for sending NOTIFYs over TCP?
> Thanks
> Klaus
>
--
https://lists.nic.cz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/knot-dns-users
Am 08.06.2018 um 16:28 schrieb Klaus Darilion:
> Great: I just noticed that installing knot-dnsutils uninstalls dnsutils.
> Is kdig completely backwards-compatible to dig?
Answering myself: No :-( (e.g +trace is missing)
So, it is bad that kdig and dig can not be installed concurrently (at
Am 08.06.2018 um 14:59 schrieb Anand Buddhdev:
> However, if you can't easily modify Knot to use UDP instead of TCP for
> NOTIFY, it doesn't bother me personally, because a NOTIFY receiver
> should also be able to accept TCP (TCP is required by DNS). But I can
> see Klaus's viewpoint. However,
Am 08.06.2018 um 15:21 schrieb Daniel Stirnimann:
>> Every outgoing DNS message from Knot is over TCP. We didn't want to wait
>> or deduce whether a slave got the message.
>
> I like this approach a lot. We had problems in the past that notifies
> got lost in a network which was not on our
On 06/08/2018 03:06 PM, Daniel Salzman wrote:
> Hi Anand,
>
> I fully understand your argument, but this was our decision in the past.
> Every outgoing DNS message from Knot is over TCP. We didn't want to wait
s/outgoing/knot-initiated
> or deduce whether a slave got the message.
>
> Best,
>
Hi Anand,
I fully understand your argument, but this was our decision in the past.
Every outgoing DNS message from Knot is over TCP. We didn't want to wait
or deduce whether a slave got the message.
Best,
Daniel
On 06/08/2018 02:59 PM, Anand Buddhdev wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> I don't run Knot
> Every outgoing DNS message from Knot is over TCP. We didn't want to wait
> or deduce whether a slave got the message.
I like this approach a lot. We had problems in the past that notifies
got lost in a network which was not on our control. We had to work
around it by lowering the SOA refresh
Hi Daniel,
I don't run Knot DNS as a master, so I don't see this issue. Even if I
ran Knot DNS as a master, I'm not terribly bothered with NOTIFY over TCP.
Having said that, I don't think it's very fair to say that UDP is
unreliable, and there are various reasons for it:
1. NOTIFY is a hint,
btw: does anybody knows a tool for sending NOTIFYs over TCP?
Thanks
Klaus
--
https://lists.nic.cz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/knot-dns-users
Hi Klaus,
Knot DNS always sends NOTIFY over TCP. It's intentional, because UDP is
unreliable.
Unfortunately, it's not possible to easily switch to UDP :-/
Regards,
Daniel
On 06/08/2018 12:54 PM, Klaus Darilion wrote:
> Hi!
>
> One of our customers uses Knot 2.6.7 as hidden master which sends
Hi!
One of our customers uses Knot 2.6.7 as hidden master which sends
NOTIFYs to our slave service. He reported that Knot can not send the
NOTIFYs, ie:
knotd[10808]: warning: [example.com.] notify, outgoing,
2a02:850:8::6@53: failed (connection reset)
It seems that Knot sometimes tries to send
12 matches
Mail list logo
