2010/7/1 Y z
>
> (bind version 9.7.0-P1)
>
> A DNS slave server has two IPs: an internal RFC1918 number to talk to
> the internal net, and an external one to talk to the rest of the world.
>
> If I *don't* put the external IP in a master:
>
> zone "example.com" {
> type slave;
> file "example";
>
(bind version 9.7.0-P1)
A DNS slave server has two IPs: an internal RFC1918 number to talk to
the internal net, and an external one to talk to the rest of the world.
If I *don't* put the external IP in a master:
zone "example.com" {
type slave;
file "example";
masters port 1053 { 172.16.0.30; }
In message <201007011210381811...@114.com.cn>, "ShanyiWan" writes:
> SOA Record query :
>
> 01-Jul-2010 12:00:09.121 dns_rdata_fromtext: buffer-0xbff9b414:1: near '20100
> 701000': out of range
> 01-Jul-2010 12:00:09.121 dns_sdlz_putrr returned error. Error code was: out o
> f range
> What is the
SOA Record query :
01-Jul-2010 12:00:09.121 dns_rdata_fromtext: buffer-0xbff9b414:1: near
'20100701000': out of range
01-Jul-2010 12:00:09.121 dns_sdlz_putrr returned error. Error code was: out of
range
What is the scope of the serial field values?
and data fields(table:dns_records) cannot be
In message , aldu
s jung writes:
> Hi, I am hoping to learn more about how BIND v 9.7.0 implements negative
> caching of
> delegated subdomains. I've tested and found that BIND observes a different
> TTL for
> name errors than I would expect it to abide by, but that could be my lack
> of understa
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Bind wrote:
Hello
I compiled Bind971 on FreeBSD 8 (amd64).
FYI, you may get better results by using /usr/ports/dns/bind97.
Hello
I compiled Bind971 on FreeBSD 8 (amd64).
./configure --prefix=/opt/
--enable-threads --sysconfdir=/opt/config --localstatedir=/opt/
--sbindir=/opt/named --datarootdir=/opt/ --enable-shared=no
--with-openssl
everything is ok and it works. but when i get top command,,freebsd returns
many na
Hi, I am hoping to learn more about how BIND v 9.7.0 implements negative
caching of
delegated subdomains. I've tested and found that BIND observes a different
TTL for
name errors than I would expect it to abide by, but that could be my lack
of understanding of what TTL a DNS server is supposed to
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
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
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:
11 matches
Mail list logo