lient yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy(not include acl) →9.9.4:OK 9.9.18:NG
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: 大浦 義
> Sent: Friday, October 4, 2024 9:35 AM
> To: Matus UHLAR - fantomas ; bind-users@lists.isc.org
> Subject: RE: Referencing by cname from one authoritative zone to another
>
ber 4, 2024 9:35 AM
> To: Matus UHLAR - fantomas ; bind-users@lists.isc.org
> Subject: RE: Referencing by cname from one authoritative zone to another
> authoritative zone
>
> Dear.
>
> ・9.9.4
> Master
> ns0.bbb.co.jp
> Slave
> ns1.bbb.co.jp
> ns2.bbb.co.jp
>
> ・
nclude acl) →9.9.4:OK 9.9.18:NG
-Original Message-
From: 大浦 義
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2024 9:35 AM
To: Matus UHLAR - fantomas ; bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: RE: Referencing by cname from one authoritative zone to another
authoritative zone
Dear.
・9.9.4
Master
ns0.bbb.co.jp
Slave
ns1
MSG SIZE rcvd: 89
-Original Message-
From: bind-users On Behalf Of Matus UHLAR -
fantomas
Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2024 6:50 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Referencing by cname from one authoritative zone to another
authoritative zone
On 03.10.24 09:21, 大浦 義 wrote:
&g
These are authoritative servers and the other domain is out of bailiwick, see
minimal-responses:
https://bind9.readthedocs.io/en/v9.18.30/reference.html#namedconf-statement-minimal-responses
Anyway any extra records are going to be thrown away by any DNS resolver
following the protocol,
so ther
On 03.10.24 09:21, 大浦 義 wrote:
・9.9.4→OK
# dig @ns1.bbb.co.jp time1.aaa.ne.jp
;; ANSWER SECTION:
time1.aaa.ne.jp. 3600IN CNAME ns2.bbb.co.jp.
ns2.bbb.co.jp. 900 IN A 1.2.3.5
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
bbb.co.jp. 900 IN NS ns6-tk02.ccc.a
Oct 03 18:16:36 JST 2024
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 103
-Original Message-
From: bind-users On Behalf Of Matus UHLAR -
fantomas
Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2024 5:58 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: Referencing by cname from one authoritative zone to another
authoritative zone
On 03.10
On 03.10.24 08:40, 大浦 義 wrote:
Referencing by cname from one authoritative zone to another authoritative zone
may not work properly depending on the version.
Is this due to a specification change? Is there a way to handle this?
I am running nslookup from a client that is not included in acl resp
8 matches
Mail list logo