also sprach Mark Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.10.13.2231 +0200]:
> Sorry, I was taking the above question as a separate question, not
> necessarily relating to the original context. I do specify some of my
> ISP's DNS as forwarders to bind, and I use bind because my machine's the
> server tha
On Sunday 13 October 2002 01:31 pm, Mark Carroll wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 the mental interface of
> >
> > Mark Carroll told:
> > > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Mike Egglestone wrote:
> > > > Would it be unwise to install bind on your own box?
> > > >
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 the mental interface of
> Mark Carroll told:
>
> > On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Mike Egglestone wrote:
> >
> > > Would it be unwise to install bind on your own box?
> > > and then set your resolv.conf to
> > > nameserver 127.0.0.1 ???
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 the mental interface of
Mark Carroll told:
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Mike Egglestone wrote:
>
> > Would it be unwise to install bind on your own box?
> > and then set your resolv.conf to
> > nameserver 127.0.0.1 ???
>
> I do exactly that, then all my nameserver config is don
also sprach Mike Egglestone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.10.13.1932 +0200]:
> Would it be unwise to install bind on your own box?
> and then set your resolv.conf to
> nameserver 127.0.0.1 ???
He should still use an upstream forwarder (what a misnomer!) as
connecting to the root servers directly u
also sprach Frank Gevaerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.10.13.2010 +0200]:
> Install a local nameserver, without upstream forwarders, but with full
> root.cache. This way, your local DNS will contact the root nameservers
> directly instead of going through your ISP.
No. See my other post.
--
.''`
also sprach Gerald V. Livingston II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.10.13.1832 +0200]:
> The name servers that I normall use with my ISP are having a few
> "flakiness" issues today. I recall seeing a link to a list of name
> servers that can be used by the public freely (ie. the admins don't
> get upset
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Mike Egglestone wrote:
> Would it be unwise to install bind on your own box?
> and then set your resolv.conf to
> nameserver 127.0.0.1 ???
I do exactly that, then all my nameserver config is done in /etc/bind/
Seems to work okay.
-- Mark
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EM
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 12:52:21PM -0500, Gerald V. Livingston II wrote:
> > Quoting "Gerald V. Livingston II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >> The name servers that I normall use with my ISP are having a few
> >> "flakiness" issues today. I recall seeing a link to a list of name
> >> servers that ca
> Quoting "Gerald V. Livingston II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> The name servers that I normall use with my ISP are having a few
>> "flakiness" issues today. I recall seeing a link to a list of name
>> servers that can be used by the public freely (ie. the admins
>> don't get upset if you stick them
Would it be unwise to install bind on your own box?
and then set your resolv.conf to
nameserver 127.0.0.1 ???
Mike
Quoting "Gerald V. Livingston II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The name servers that I normall use with my ISP are having a few
> "flakiness" issues today. I recall seeing a link to a
The name servers that I normall use with my ISP are having a few
"flakiness" issues today. I recall seeing a link to a list of name
servers that can be used by the public freely (ie. the admins don't
get upset if you stick them in your /etc/resolv.conf).
Does anyone happen to know of such a list?
12 matches
Mail list logo
