The DNS admins at thehartford.com seem to feel that this nameserver mismatch is
working as expected. Here's some of the feedback we received from them when we
questioned the setup:
~We use load balancers for
the majority of our internet facing URLs. We have multiple datac
One of the things that got us is we didn't know BIND 8 automatically created
delegation records in a zone at the zone cut, if the nameserver knew of the
existence of the cut.
For example, if we have the following zones in our named.conf:
zone "example.com" { ... };
zone "sub.example.com" {
hugo hugoo wrote:
> Is there anything I have to look at to check that all is OK in terms of
> performances when I will be in BIND9?
Well, you haven't really given any information about your current setup
and usage, so I have no idea if you're trying to run a million-user ISP
with DNS on an old In
I do not change the zone files.
I only remove some logging category nt compatible with bind9, that's all.
I agree that I have to go to BIND9.
My question was related to the fact that I am a little worry about a difference
in performance when I will be in BIND9.
So I wonder if I do not have to
abushla...@ies.etisalat.ae wrote:
> What about zone configuration in BIND 8 and BIND 9? Is there any
> difference between the two ?
Do you mean the zone configuration in named.conf, or the zonefiles?
BIND9 has a doc/misc/migration document which gives plenty of good advice
on configuration chang
On 6/15/2011 4:06 PM, abushla...@ies.etisalat.ae wrote:
What about zone configuration in BIND 8 and BIND 9? Is there any difference
between the two ?
Thanks& Regards
-Original Message-
From: Eivind Olsen
Sender: bind-users-bounces+abushlaibi=ies.etisalat...@lists.isc.org
Date: Wed, 15
What about zone configuration in BIND 8 and BIND 9? Is there any difference
between the two ?
Thanks & Regards
-Original Message-
From: Eivind Olsen
Sender: bind-users-bounces+abushlaibi=ies.etisalat...@lists.isc.org
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 20:30:58
To:
Subject: Re: bind 9 performance
hugo hugoo wrote:
> - Has anyone faced a performance problem due to an upgrade bind8/bind9?
I didn't notice anything like that when I last upgraded from BIND8 (back
in 2001 or so).
When that is said: what kind of hardware are you running it on? Single
CPU? Multiple cores? I've seen some fairly a
Hello all,
I plan to replace bind8 with bind9 on a same hardware (just software upgrade).
- Has anyone faced a performance problem due to an upgrade bind8/bind9?
- Is bind9 less performant or do I have to be confident on this aspect?
Thanks in advance for any feedback,
Hugo,
Just wanted to say thanks to everyone for the quick feedback!
We appreciate your assistance on this.
Marty
> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:25:00 -0700
> From: mich...@rancid.berkeley.edu
> To: sun-g...@live.com
> CC: bind-users@lists.isc.org
> Subject: Re: question about thehartford.com domai
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, M. Meadows wrote:
Question : our check of whois indicates that ns1.thehartford.com and
ns2.thehartford.com are
the authoritative nameservers for thehartford.com. A dig with a +trace for
eftc.thehartford.com seems to indicate that they are indeed the auth
nameservers. It?
On 6/12/2011 4:00 PM, Rodrigo Faria Tavares wrote:
Hello,
I installed bind in CentOS release 5.6 (Final).
My DNS Server not ping alias (with cname), so the steps:
I installed this packages:
[root@centos ~]# rpm -qa | grep bind
ypbind-1.19-12.el5
bind-libs-9.3.6-16.P1.el5
bind-chroot-9.3.6-16.P
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:51:38AM -0300, Noel Rocha wrote:
Thanks.
In this situation:
- KSK signed ZSK(DNSKEY RR).
- ZSK signing others RR of zone.
I don't see reason for the KSK be present in operations unless
add/delete RR DNSKEY.
Signature expiration.
Info at the authoritative servers doesn't match the glue records.
We see this all the time on our recursive resolvers.
rich-goodsons-computer:~ rgoodson$ dig +norec @ns1.thehartford.com
thehartford.com NS
; <<>> DiG 9.6.0-APPLE-P2 <<>> +norec @ns1.thehartford.com thehartford.com NS
; (1 server
Thanks.
In this situation:
- KSK signed ZSK(DNSKEY RR).
- ZSK signing others RR of zone.
I don't see reason for the KSK be present in operations unless
add/delete RR DNSKEY.
I think this error message it's a bug:
dns_dnssec_findzonekeys2: error reading private key file
my.zone.com/NSEC3RSASH
On 6/15/2011 8:28 AM, M. Meadows wrote:
> Question : why does eftc as an address record in the thehartford.com
> zone file have a 30 second TTL? Seems … very … short. I think most
> nameservers won’t do less than a minute for an address record. Right?
No. There is no problem with a short TTL.
>
Good morning.
We sent the following email to the dns managers at thehartford.com this morning:
-
Hi. We’re experiencing some issues with address record lookups for
eftc.thehartford.com. We’ve got a coupl
> I changed ns[1-2].myzone.com to new IPs in myzone.com's DNS, then how to
> let BIND for example.com to know the NS has been changed?
Since you have decided to not use the real names I can't give specific
advice.
I do wonder if you might have forgotten to also update the glue records;
if ns[1-2]
I remember there is a rndc option, but not sure.
> -Original Message-
> From: bortzme...@nic.fr
> Sent: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 09:06:54 +0200
> To: pen...@inbox.com
> Subject: Re: tell BIND the nameservers have been changed
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 08:41:50PM -0800,
> Jeff Peng wrote
> a
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 08:41:50PM -0800,
Jeff Peng wrote
a message of 18 lines which said:
> I changed ns[1-2].myzone.com to new IPs in myzone.com's DNS, then
> how to let BIND for example.com to know the NS has been changed?
Wait for the TTL to expire seems the most reasonable course of act
20 matches
Mail list logo
