I don't think my earlier response to this has made it past moderation, but an update:
iptables looks pretty benign to me...: Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere state RELATED,ESTABLISHED ACCEPT icmp -- anywhere anywhere ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere ACCEPT tcp -- anywhere anywhere state NEW tcp dpt:ssh ACCEPT tcp -- anywhere anywhere state NEW tcp dpt:domain ACCEPT udp -- anywhere anywhere state NEW udp dpt:domain (... other rules for allowed ports) ACCEPT ospf -- anywhere anywhere state NEW REJECT all -- anywhere anywhere reject-with icmp-host-prohibited Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere PHYSDEV match --physdev-is-bridged ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere state RELATED,ESTABLISHED ACCEPT icmp -- anywhere anywhere ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere REJECT all -- anywhere anywhere reject-with icmp-host-prohibited Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination cheers and thanks, Ian Veach, Senior Systems Analyst System Computing Services, Nevada System of Higher Education On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 1:27 PM, ian_ve...@nshe.nevada.edu < ian_ve...@nshe.nevada.edu> wrote: > > I suppose, but doubt it. I will look when I get back in office. We do > pretty benign ip tables though - a few firewall exceptions, etc., and no > Translations or any fancy stuff. For anycast, we do use quagga and zebra > for the ospf, but that's only for the service addresses on the loop back > device > > Thanks! > > Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> > Date: 07/18/2016 12:12 (GMT-08:00) > To: comp-protocols-dns-b...@isc.org > Subject: Re: weird transfer-source problems with one DNS node > > In article <mailman.111.1468862922.15653.bind-us...@lists.isc.org>, > Ian Veach <ian_ve...@nshe.nevada.edu> wrote: > > > So unless I'm crazy (possible, regardless)... named is reporting using > 230, > > but OS is showing 240 (and remote host logs confirm 240)!? > > Could something in iptables be transforming it at a lower level? > > -- > Barry Margolin > Arlington, MA > _______________________________________________ > Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to > unsubscribe from this list > > bind-users mailing list > bind-users@lists.isc.org > https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users > -- PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: In accordance with NRS Chapter 239, this email and responses, unless otherwise made confidential by law, may be subject to the Nevada Public Records laws and may be disclosed to the public upon request.
_______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
