Re: [Pdns-users] Pipebackend and "Should not get here"

2015-08-14 Thread p...@w3eta.net
Thanks, that was the problem. -- Dan Campbell > On August 14, 2015 at 12:31 PM Aki Tuomi wrote: > > > Well, you can't have CNAME and NS on same label. Just saying. > > That's probably one problem. > > Aki > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 09:24:36AM -

Re: [Pdns-users] Pipebackend and "Should not get here"

2015-08-13 Thread p...@w3eta.net
> On August 12, 2015 at 6:32 AM Peter van Dijk > wrote: > > > Hello, > > On 12 Aug 2015, at 12:19, Aki Tuomi wrote: > > > You can replace your domain with mydomain in this case. > > No - please do not replace stuff. Debugging with obfuscated data is a > major pain. We need real data to deb

[Pdns-users] Pipebacknd and "Should not get here"

2015-07-28 Thread p...@w3eta.net
I'm in the process of upgrading some PowerDNS Authoritative servers from 2.9.22 to 3.4.5, and I use the pipebackend. I've noticed that when DNS queries comes in for a non-existent name in my domain, I get records like the following in /var/log/messages: Jul 28 16:31:18 esd05ns01d pdns[13964]:

[Pdns-users] PDNS Authoritative server 2.9.22 on SLES V11?

2014-09-18 Thread p...@w3eta.net
I manage a few PDNS v2.9.22 authoritative servers on SLES V10 and wee need to upgrade the OS to SLES V11. We would prefer not to upgrade PDNS. I was wondering -- does anyone of the list have experience with OS upgrades and v2.9.22? Specifically SLES V11? I'm trying to gauge the risk in updrading