Re: [Pdns-users] pdns recursor 3.2 cname resolution phenomenon

2010-09-22 Thread Thomas Mieslinger
On 09/20/10 07:53 AM, bert hubert wrote: On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 07:32:51AM +0200, Thomas Mieslinger wrote: we're using pdns recursor for out company internal name resolution. [..] containing answer has the NXDOMAIN Bit set. Can you elaborate a bit more? I think this issue is fixed in 3.3,

Re: [Pdns-users] pdns recursor 3.2 cname resolution phenomenon

2010-09-22 Thread bert hubert
Thomas, Please provide real domain names, otherwise I can't test. Kind regards, Bert Hubert On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 04:53:22PM +0200, Thomas Mieslinger wrote: On 09/20/10 07:53 AM, bert hubert wrote: On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 07:32:51AM +0200, Thomas Mieslinger wrote: we're using pdns

Re: [Pdns-users] pdns recursor 3.2 cname resolution phenomenon

2010-09-22 Thread bert hubert
Thomas, As discussed before, sending out an NXDOMAIN means just that, an NXDOMAIN. Please don't do it. I don't think it would be a good idea to make PowerDNS broken. If you want to do it personally, apply this patch and recompile: --- ../syncres.cc 2010-09-16 17:17:38.496153009 +0200

[Pdns-users] pdns recursor 3.2 cname resolution phenomenon

2010-09-19 Thread Thomas Mieslinger
Hi, we're using pdns recursor for out company internal name resolution. We have some strange setups to support that can't easily be removed. In some of our offical Zones are CNAMEs. The A records to these Names are in our internal Zones configured in forward.zones. Getting the A records

Re: [Pdns-users] pdns recursor 3.2 cname resolution phenomenon

2010-09-19 Thread bert hubert
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 07:32:51AM +0200, Thomas Mieslinger wrote: we're using pdns recursor for out company internal name resolution. We have some strange setups to support that can't easily be removed. In some of our offical Zones are CNAMEs. The A records to these Names are in our