Apologies,
Our workaround was actually the addition of 2 lines:
check-names master ignore;
check-names response ignore;
Without the second ‘response’ clause, the update does not error, but does not
get applied to the record.
—
Raymond Walker
Software Systems Engineer StSp.
ITS - Northern Arizona University
From: Ray Walker <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday, June 9, 2014 at 3:18 PM
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: Bad owner name on hidden primary
Our current workaround is to add the following to NAMED configuration:
check-names master ignore;
Is there a more preferred solution?
…or perhaps a different way of looking at this issue?
—
Raymond Walker
Software Systems Engineer StSp.
ITS - Northern Arizona University
From: Ray Walker <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday, June 9, 2014 at 11:47 AM
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Bad owner name on hidden primary
Running BIND 9.9.5:
On moving to a hidden primary setup, dynamic updates to zones we are master for
with “unallowed characters” (underscores in our case) have started to fail with
the error "bad owner name (check-names)” In the past (pre hidden primary) they
did not fail.
In the past we have not used the ‘check-names’ option, so behavior should be
default… odd since the default behavior is to fail for master zones.
Could this have something to do with the SOA of the zone no longer being the
actual primary?
—
Raymond Walker
Software Systems Engineer StSp.
ITS - Northern Arizona University
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
