On Aug 20, 2013, at 11:31 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 20 Aug 2013, at 20:42 , Alan Clegg wrote:
>> If it's down that long and very often, you may want to consider putting your
>> DNS on a reliable server/circuit/data center.
>
> Well, often is somewhat more than... 5? times in the last 18 years..
Perhaps you should check that the master is running a nameserver
and that it doesn't have firewalls blocking the DNS (both UDP and
TCP).
% dig soa covisp.net @75.148.117.92
; <<>> DiG 9.10.0pre-alpha <<>> soa covisp.net @75.148.117.92
;; global options: +cmd
;; connection timed out; no servers c
On 20 Aug 2013, at 14:38 , Alan Clegg wrote:
> To convert master to slave:
[snip]
> Bazinga!
OK. Not Bazinga.
$ grep covisp named.conf
zone "covisp.net" { type slave; file "slave/covisp.net"; masters {
75.148.117.92; }; };
$ rndc status
version: 9.9.3-P2
CPUs found: 2
worker threads: 2
UDP li
On Aug 20, 2013, at 10:32 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> I need the data in text because sometimes, the primary dns is down, and
> sometimes it si down long enough to require that I switch the slave to be the
> primary, and that means master. I can't do that if I don't have text records.
Eh... You can
On Aug 20, 2013, at 7:35 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>> zone example.com {
>> type master;// I own this.
>> file "files/example.com"; // Here's where I read them from
>> };
>>
>> it will become:
>>
>> zone example.com {
>> type slave; // Now
On Aug 20, 2013, at 2:36 PM, LuKreme wrote:
>
> On 18 Aug 2013, at 19:20 , Noel Butler wrote:
>
>> As has been said already, there is really very little to it, and unless you
>> sent it to Alan off-list, you still have _NOT_ provided the error logs
>> after being asked by more than one pe
On 18 Aug 2013, at 19:20 , Noel Butler wrote:
> As has been said already, there is really very little to it, and unless you
> sent it to Alan off-list, you still have _NOT_ provided the error logs
> after being asked by more than one person.
Thanks, I thought I was clear.
I am *not* gettin
Dave Warren wrote:
>
> Change the zones from master to slave in your named.conf? There really isn't
> much more to it than that, assuming you have a new authoritative master is
> already configured and serving the zones.
However, beware that BIND 9.9 defaults to "raw" zone files for slaved
zones,
On Sun, 2013-08-18 at 17:36 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2013, at 14:06 , Dave Warren wrote:
>
> > Change the zones from master to slave in your named.conf? There really
> > isn't much more to it than that, assuming you have a new authoritative
> > master is already configured and serving
On 2013-08-18 16:36, LuKreme wrote:
On 18 Aug 2013, at 14:06 , Dave Warren wrote:
Change the zones from master to slave in your named.conf? There really isn't
much more to it than that, assuming you have a new authoritative master is
already configured and serving the zones.
Oh, there's a b
On 18 Aug 2013, at 14:06 , Dave Warren wrote:
> Change the zones from master to slave in your named.conf? There really isn't
> much more to it than that, assuming you have a new authoritative master is
> already configured and serving the zones.
Oh, there's a bit more to it than that. There's
On 18/08/13 22:06, Dave Warren wrote:
> On 2013-08-18 10:39, LuKreme wrote:
>> Since it is all working, what I am looking for now is "how to convert
>> you master bind server to a slave".
>
> Change the zones from master to slave in your named.conf? There really
> isn't much more to it than that,
On 2013-08-18 10:39, LuKreme wrote:
Since it is all working, what I am looking for now is "how to convert you master
bind server to a slave".
Change the zones from master to slave in your named.conf? There really
isn't much more to it than that, assuming you have a new authoritative
master i
On 17 Aug 2013, at 09:02 , Alan Clegg wrote:
> On Aug 17, 2013, at 5:12 AM, LuKreme wrote:
>> On Aug 16, 2013, at 23:28, Noel Butler wrote:
>>> I'm still trying to work out what the hell bind99 is
>> <:).png>
>> Sorry, that is how ports refers to bind 9.9
>
> Thanks for that, but any word on th
On Aug 17, 2013, at 5:12 AM, LuKreme wrote:
> On Aug 16, 2013, at 23:28, Noel Butler wrote:
>> I'm still trying to work out what the hell bind99 is
> <:).png>
> Sorry, that is how ports refers to bind 9.9
Thanks for that, but any word on the actual error messages?
AlanC
--
Alan Clegg | +1-91
On Aug 16, 2013, at 23:28, Noel Butler wrote:
> I'm still trying to work out what the hell bind99 is <>
Sorry, that is how ports refers to bind 9.9
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-
On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 01:18 -0400, Alan Clegg wrote:
> On Aug 17, 2013, at 12:42 AM, LuKreme wrote:
>
> > [...] I could not get the slave to do anything other than post errors and
> > refuse to start. Usually they were along the lines of not being able to
> > bind to port 953 or of not being a
On Aug 17, 2013, at 12:42 AM, LuKreme wrote:
> [...] I could not get the slave to do anything other than post errors and
> refuse to start. Usually they were along the lines of not being able to bind
> to port 953 or of not being able to receive the zone updates.
Can you provide the actual er
I've been running bind 9 on my FreeBSD servers for awhile. After putting a new
machine in place I installed bind99 via ports on the new machine (the master)
and updated bind to bind99 on the secondary DNS (the slave).
However, I could not get the slave to do anything other than post errors and
19 matches
Mail list logo
