I asked for complete, unedited configs, both old and new. This waay I
cannot help you.
-Otto
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 02:09:11AM -0300, Alex Trevisol wrote:
> in my old configuration it was enough to activate the option
> # edns-subnet-whitelist List of netmasks and domains that we should
in my old configuration it was enough to activate the option
# edns-subnet-whitelist List of netmasks and domains that we should enable
EDNS subnet for (deprecated)
edns-subnet-whitelist=0.0.0.0/0, ::/0
new configuration
# edns-subnet-allow-listList of netmasks and domains that we should
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 12:49:56AM -0300, Alex Trevisol via Pdns-users wrote:
> hello,
>
> I reinstalled my recuersor server, and took advantage of it and installed
> pdns-recursor 4.9, but I did the basic configuration and activated Edns in
> the same way it was before.
> edns-subnet-allow-list=
hello,
I reinstalled my recuersor server, and took advantage of it and installed
pdns-recursor 4.9, but I did the basic configuration and activated Edns in
the same way it was before.
edns-subnet-allow-list=0.0.0.0/0, ::/0 however the recursor does not
respond to queries with edns as if it had not
Hi,
i'm running a dnsdist loadbalancer with multiple powerdns auth upstream
backends. I use the gmysql backend with "allow-axfr" per domain base via
domainmetadata table in mysql. This does work when clients ask directly to pdns
but not with dnsdist in front of pdns because the real client IP
Hi everybody,
We just merged EDNS Client Subnet support in the recursor.
It works by setting edns-subnet-whitelist to a list of domain names or
nameserver netmasks that should be getting EDNS Client Subnet queries.
Eventually we may make this auto probing etc.
This feature is available in the sn
Hello Tiago,
On 5 Jun 2015, at 13:49, Tiago Ratto wrote:
called disable-edns which is commented, so I suppose that EDNS is
supported. Then a ran dig on my recursor and on google recursor and
those
are the results I got:
In currently released versions, EDNS is somewhat supported - but
edns-
Hello there!
I'm using the PDNS recursor version 3.7.2 and came across the EDNS draft.
Soon as I got time I've decided to see if the recursor would support that
feature, since on the config file there is a configuration
called disable-edns which is commented, so I suppose that EDNS is
supported. T
Hello,
On Jul 8, 2013, at 20:15 , Peter van Dijk wrote:
> Please read
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/afasterinternet/HJD2WphubOg/Lt7GB2Y9deAJ
> , then read the rest of this email.
>
> PowerDNS does not currently support using two option numbers in parallel -
> patches welcome.
>
> As Wlime
Hello,
On Jul 9, 2013, at 13:28 , Aki Tuomi wrote:
> Happy news, PowerDNS has no support for multiple edns subnet option numbers.
> Behaviour has been changed to always support option number 8 (IANA assigment)
> and you can also define list of option numbers to respect as well, the default
> bei
On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 08:21:51AM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> Hello Aki,
>
> On Jul 8, 2013, at 21:38 , Aki Tuomi wrote:
>
> > Can you please elaborate who should do this and when? Recursor operators?
> > Auth
> > operators?
>
>
> There is no action required from recursor operators. Auth
Hello Aki,
On Jul 8, 2013, at 21:38 , Aki Tuomi wrote:
> Can you please elaborate who should do this and when? Recursor operators? Auth
> operators?
There is no action required from recursor operators. Auth operators that use
edns-client-subnet in a backend need to take action on the to-be-de
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 08:15:57PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Please read
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/afasterinternet/HJD2WphubOg/Lt7GB2Y9deAJ
> , then read the rest of this email.
>
> PowerDNS does not currently support using two option numbers in parallel -
> patches welc
Hello,
Please read
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/afasterinternet/HJD2WphubOg/Lt7GB2Y9deAJ
, then read the rest of this email.
PowerDNS does not currently support using two option numbers in parallel -
patches welcome.
As Wlimer's email promises a change-over date, our current advice is to
s
Hello David,
On Jun 10, 2012, at 22:36 , David Hawthorne wrote:
> When I send a request with dig +client=123.123.123.123, I always get a
> response witha netmask of /1:
>
> ; CLIENT-SUBNET: 123.123.123.123/32/1
>
> I can't find a way to change that /1 to something else. Google returns a /19
When I send a request with dig +client=123.123.123.123, I always get a response
witha netmask of /1:
; CLIENT-SUBNET: 123.123.123.123/32/1
I can't find a way to change that /1 to something else. Google returns a /19
there. Shouldn't this be a configurable?
see more at: http://wilmer.gaa.st/e
Hi Peter,
I've tested with revision 2258.
edns-client-subnet feature works with all netmaks for IPv4
Thanks!
Regards,
Paul
07.09.2011, 16:02, "Peter van Dijk" :
> Hello Paul,
>
> On Sep 2, 2011, at 9:05 AM, Xek PL wrote:
>
>> I'm testing edns-client-subnet feature (pdns-static-3.0-1.x86_64.rpm
Hello Paul,
On Sep 2, 2011, at 9:05 AM, Xek PL wrote:
> I'm testing edns-client-subnet feature (pdns-static-3.0-1.x86_64.rpm)
>
> When request goes with netmask /32 (e.g. 1.2.3.0/32)- it's OK.
> Pipe backend receive IP/32 in last field.
> RECV: Q example.com IN SOA -1 1
Hello,
I'm testing edns-client-subnet feature (pdns-static-3.0-1.x86_64.rpm)
When request goes with netmask /32 (e.g. 1.2.3.0/32)- it's OK.
Pipe backend receive IP/32 in last field.
RECV: Q example.com IN SOA -1 127.0.0.1 0.0.0.0
1.2.3.0/32
But when request has smalle
Its my understanding that EDNS is going to be required to exchange keys
properly for DNSSEC. Am I wrong? Is EDNS going to be a requirement in
the future?
Thanks in advance,
Curtis
On 3/18/2010 8:40 PM, Michael Fincham wrote:
Hi Bert,
Thanks for the expedient and comprehensive reply.
On
Hi Bert,
Thanks for the expedient and comprehensive reply.
On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 06:45 +0100, bert hubert wrote:
>
> The 'nothing but trouble' refers to the surprisingly large number of servers
> that when queried with EDNS on, either provide no answer, return a SERVFAIL
> or a malformed answer.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 03:48:48PM +1300, Michael Fincham wrote:
> Looking at the source it seems in 3.2 an option "disable-edns=no" was
> added which turns EDNS support on. A cursory test here shows that adding
> this to the stock config does cause the dns-oarc reply size test to
> report a reply
Hi all,
I've just tested the PowerDNS Recursor 3.2 with its out of the box
configuration against the tests outlined at
https://www.dns-oarc.net/oarc/services/replysizetest
It seems that EDNS is disabled by default, which is confirmed by the
comment attached to changeset #1430
(http://wiki.powerdn
23 matches
Mail list logo
