Re: Named-checkzone stops silently

On Sun, Jan 05, 2025 at 08:39:48AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote: > Well it is waiting for the zone contents on stdin. Try specifying both the > zone name and the file that it should be reading. > -- > Mark Andrews For some reason I thought that would be found via named.conf > > > On 5 Jan 202

Re: Named-checkzone stops silently

On Sat, Jan 04, 2025 at 10:41:38PM +0100, Nico CARTRON wrote: > On 04-Jan-2025 21:21 CET, wrote: > > > nameserver using FreeBSD 12.2 and bind9.18.32. It works to the > > Not answering about the BIND part, but why are you running this on FreeBSD > 12.2, Sorry, typo. It's 14.2 Apologies for th

Re: Named-checkzone stops silently

On 04-Jan-2025 21:21 CET, wrote: > I'm setting up a new, non-recursive, authoritative secondary > nameserver using FreeBSD 12.2 and bind9.18.32. It works to the > extent that runs and answers queries correctly, but attempts to use > > bob@pelorus:/usr/local/etc/namedb/slave % named-checkzone -d

Re: Named-checkzone stops silently

Well it is waiting for the zone contents on stdin. Try specifying both the zone name and the file that it should be reading. -- Mark Andrews > On 5 Jan 2025, at 07:21, f...@www.zefox.net wrote: > > I'm setting up a new, non-recursive, authoritative secondary > nameserver using FreeBSD 12.2

Re: named-checkzone fail

On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 3:15 AM Mark Andrews wrote: > > > On 11 Sep 2024, at 16:06, Lee wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 10:52 PM Mark Andrews wrote: > >> > >>> On 11 Sep 2024, at 12:10, Lee wrote: > >>> > >>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 6:17 PM Mark Andrews wrote: > > Comma is legal in

Re: named-checkzone fail

> On 11 Sep 2024, at 16:06, Lee wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 10:52 PM Mark Andrews wrote: >> >>> On 11 Sep 2024, at 12:10, Lee wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 6:17 PM Mark Andrews wrote: Comma is legal in a domain name. It isn’t legal in a host name which are a

Re: named-checkzone fail

On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 10:52 PM Mark Andrews wrote: > > > On 11 Sep 2024, at 12:10, Lee wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 6:17 PM Mark Andrews wrote: > >> > >> Comma is legal in a domain name. It isn’t legal in a host name which are > >> a subset of domain names. Named-checkzone is working

Re: named-checkzone fail

> On 11 Sep 2024, at 12:10, Lee wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 6:17 PM Mark Andrews wrote: >> >> Comma is legal in a domain name. It isn’t legal in a host name which are a >> subset of domain names. Named-checkzone is working exactly as it should. > > Except this isn't really a domain

Re: named-checkzone fail

On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 6:17 PM Mark Andrews wrote: > > Comma is legal in a domain name. It isn’t legal in a host name which are a > subset of domain names. Named-checkzone is working exactly as it should. Except this isn't really a domain name - it's a whatever-it's-called in a response policy

Re: named-checkzone fail

Comma is legal in a domain name. It isn’t legal in a host name which are a subset of domain names. Named-checkzone is working exactly as it should. If the current origin is example.com. then comma expands to ,.example.com. as it is treaded as a relative name. -- Mark Andrews > On 11 Sep 20

Re: named-checkzone as library?

Felipe Gasper wrote: > > Is there any public code interface that exposes named-checkzone’s > functionality? > I’d specifically like to have numeric error codes rather than strings. It isn't easy to do that, I'm afraid. There are two places that don't do what you want. The source for named-check

Re: named-checkzone with multiple $ORIGIN

Ok that was my misunderstanding of named-checkzone. I though I had to check for all $ORIGINs. I haven't played with IPv6 yet. I hope I'll have a chance to do it eventually. Thanks for your time guys! On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: > Most certainly - Yes. > > You have a s

Re: named-checkzone with multiple $ORIGIN

Most certainly - Yes. You have a single zone here, thus only: named-checkzone example.com example.com.zone ...should work. Wait till you play with a reverse IPv6 zone - where I personally use many $ORIGIN statements - saves hours of typing and makes reading the Zones s

Re: named-checkzone with multiple $ORIGIN

Bernard Fay wrote: > > should I understand while using named-checkzone I need to enter *only* > the top domain and named-checkzone will understand the subdomains > defined by the multiple $ORIGIN in the zone file? Yes, named-checkzone basically just loads the zone file (the whole thing) as if it

Re: named-checkzone with multiple $ORIGIN

I understand what $ORIGIN is doing by reducing the typing and making it easier to maintain the zone files. To Tony, should I understand while using named-checkzone I need to enter *only* the top domain and named-checkzone will understand the subdomains defined by the multiple $ORIGIN in the zone f

Re: named-checkzone with multiple $ORIGIN

In message , Bernard Fay writes: > Sorry keyboard problem... > > > I took control of a DNS based on Bind 9.9. One of the zone files have > multiple $ORIGIN for example: > > $ORIGIN example.com > ... > $ORIGIN sub1.example.com > ... > $ORIGIN sub2.example.com > ... > $ORIGIN sub3.example.com >

Re: named-checkzone with multiple $ORIGIN

Bernard Fay wrote: > > I took control of a DNS based on Bind 9.9. One of the zone files have > multiple $ORIGIN for example: The key thing to understand is that $ORIGIN just controls how unqualified domain names are expanded into fully-qualified domain names. In particular, $ORIGIN is completely

Re: named-checkzone with multiple $ORIGIN

Am 05.06.2017 um 14:36 schrieb Bernard Fay: Sorry keyboard problem... I took control of a DNS based on Bind 9.9. One of the zone files have multiple $ORIGIN for example: $ORIGIN example.com ... $ORIGIN sub1.example.com ... $ORIGIN sub2.example.com ... $ORIGIN s

Re: named-checkzone with multiple $ORIGIN

Sorry keyboard problem... I took control of a DNS based on Bind 9.9. One of the zone files have multiple $ORIGIN for example: $ORIGIN example.com ... $ORIGIN sub1.example.com ... $ORIGIN sub2.example.com ... $ORIGIN sub3.example.com ... While checking the zone file with: named-checkzone examp

Re: named-checkzone error "NSEC node already exists"

In message , jim writes: > --===8614228914376772213== > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00163630e869ed2ed50496c3d6e6 > > --00163630e869ed2ed50496c3d6e6 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi, > > Running BIND 9.7.0-P2-RedHat-9.7.0-5.P2.el6 Upgrade. >

Re: named-checkzone Test Runs

For the sake of thoroughness, the -j flag causes named-compilezone to also look at the .jnl files so that the zone you getis as up to date as possible. Martin ___ bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bin

Re: named-checkzone Test Runs

A list member wrote: > named-checkzone doesn't need to read the named.conf file - it just makes > sure that the zone is correct. if you want to check named.conf, you will > need to use named-checkconf > > For checking config, try > > named-checkconf -t [chroot directory] [relative path to name

RE: named-checkzone Test Runs

Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:54 PM To: bind-us...@isc.org Subject: Re: named-checkzone Test Runs I wrote: > I am testing bind9.7 and seem to not be correctly defining the > path to the localhost forward and reverse zones which are in > /var/named/etc/namedb/master. After the chr

Re: named-checkzone Test Runs

I wrote: > I am testing bind9.7 and seem to not be correctly defining the > path to the localhost forward and reverse zones which are in > /var/named/etc/namedb/master. After the chroot, they should be > found by a path of named/etc/namedb/master but so far nothing > seems to work. My than

RE: named-checkzone

So I ended up accomplishing this by using vim autocmd. In /etc/vimrc autocmd BufWritePost *.db execute "!/usr/sbin/scripts/checkzonework” if any file that has a .db is edited and written to it calls checkzonework which is a bash script that asks a few questions and calls name-checkzone. Hope

Re: named-checkzone

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 04:37:45PM -0400, Paul Amaral wrote: > I was thinking more instantaneous without moving things around. I looked at > vim vimrc autocmd but I couldn't get named-checkzone to execute and I would > still have to somehow have named-checkzone look at the last zone that was > e

Re: named-checkzone

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 03:46:37PM -0400, P.A wrote: > Hi, im trying to get some ideas how I can exec named-checkzone on a zone > file that has just been executed. We have com users who edit zone files but > forget to run the command when they are do editing the file. Trying to > figure out if any

RE: named-checkzone

.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:32 PM To: P.A; bind-us...@isc.org Subject: RE: named-checkzone My suggestion is to create a backup copy of the (current) zone files in another directory. Only allow the users to edit those files, then execute a shell script that checks them, and only moves t

RE: named-checkzone

[mailto:gord.tay...@rbc.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:32 PM To: P.A; bind-us...@isc.org Subject: RE: named-checkzone My suggestion is to create a backup copy of the (current) zone files in another directory. Only allow the users to edit those files, then execute a shell script that checks them

RE: named-checkzone

My suggestion is to create a backup copy of the (current) zone files in another directory. Only allow the users to edit those files, then execute a shell script that checks them, and only moves them to the production directory once the named-checkzone (and named-checkconf) works correctly. Otherwis

RE: named-checkzone behavior change?

which would cause the zone to fail the above checks if committed. [RT #20678] From: Jack Tavares Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 12:54 PM To: Jack Tavares; bind-users@lists.isc.org Subject: RE: named-checkzone behavior change? Correction: I am calling

RE: named-checkzone behavior change?

Correction: I am calling named-checkzone not checkconf. this: named-checkconf -k ignore -n ignore -i none test.net. should read named-checkzone -k ignore -n ignore -i none test.net. the rest of the email is correct From: Jack Tavares Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 12:49 PM To: bind-users@lists.is