On Jul 25, 2010, at 4:33 AM, Danny Mayer wrote:
On 7/24/2010 5:10 AM, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Jul 23, 2010, at 2:37 PM, Danny Mayer wrote:
On 7/22/2010 11:08 PM, Merton Campbell Crockett wrote:
Thanks for the confirmation that the problem was related to DNSSEC.
I didn't see your
Understood, but what I'm asking about is that the slave does not appear to be
losing contact with the first-listed master. In fact, from the logs, it
appears to be flipping back and forth (though not round-robinning).
Someone else asked, essentially, why? ... The network paths are diverse
Well aware of that, but we have RedHat support so we're stuck with that given
that the alternatives are self-supporting BIND (which you could argue I'm doing
right now!) or going with a 3rd party. Given the economy, I'm pleased we're
keeping RH support.
--
Peter Laws / N5UWY
National Weather
From: Warren Kumari war...@kumari.net
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 11:22:46 +0200
Sender: bind-users-bounces+oberman=es@lists.isc.org
On Jul 25, 2010, at 4:33 AM, Danny Mayer wrote:
On 7/24/2010 5:10 AM, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Jul 23, 2010, at 2:37 PM, Danny Mayer wrote:
On
It makes it really hard to follow the thread.
Why not?
Please don't top post!
From: Laws, Peter C. pl...@ou.edu
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 16:56:26 +
Sender: bind-users-bounces+oberman=es@lists.isc.org
Well aware of that, but we have RedHat support so we're stuck with
that given
Michael,
Do you have a standard template that you use for your Cisco firewall
devices?
Or are you just disabling the fixup protocol's?
Jerry
On 07/24/10 15:16, Michael Sinatra wrote:
That's true, but it doesn't quite explain why the DNS Inspection
Policy, turned on by default on the
6 matches
Mail list logo
