On 08/11/2010 13:43, Carlos Vicente wrote:
One of our recursive resolvers, running 9.7.0-P2
You're a minor version and 2 patches behind the times. Download
9.7.1-P2, and while it's compiling read the Changelog to see if anything
there applies. Worst case scenario is that you reproduce the bug
hi all
i am wondering if anyone can help because I am a little stuck with this one.
We are in the process of moving our address space from a PA block to a PI
block. This means I have had to use 2 new IPs for our name servers.
the old address space was 89.221.36.0/24 and the new address space
On 12.08.10 12:40, Michael Dilworth wrote:
We are in the process of moving our address space from a PA block to a PI
block. This means I have had to use 2 new IPs for our name servers.
the old address space was 89.221.36.0/24 and the new address space is
91.213.52.0/24
the old name
hi
many thanks for the help and apologies for my ignorance. The parent zone
here would be the .com ? how does one go about updating the delegation in
this?
mike
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
uh...@fantomas.skwrote:
On 12.08.10 12:40, Michael Dilworth wrote:
We
Am Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:58:54 +0300
schrieb Michael Dilworth dilwo...@upstreamsystems.com:
hi
many thanks for the help and apologies for my ignorance. The parent
zone here would be the .com ? how does one go about updating the
delegation in this?
mike
You need to contact your registrar
many thanks to all for your help
mike
2010/8/12 Torsten t...@the-damian.de
Am Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:58:54 +0300
schrieb Michael Dilworth dilwo...@upstreamsystems.com:
hi
many thanks for the help and apologies for my ignorance. The parent
zone here would be the .com ? how does one go
All,
We've had a report this morning that a user can't resolve:
71.225.219.134.in-addr.arpa PTR
...I think this is because the parent zone NS records point to CNAMEs. I
can see references to (much) older versions of bind not following such
delegations, but I'm not getting anything logged at
On 12.08.10 12:02, Phil Mayers wrote:
We've had a report this morning that a user can't resolve:
71.225.219.134.in-addr.arpa PTR
...I think this is because the parent zone NS records point to CNAMEs. I
can see references to (much) older versions of bind not following such
delegations,
On 12/08/10 16:34, Yohann Lepage wrote:
2010/8/12 Phil Mayersp.may...@imperial.ac.uk:
Is this still the case (that NS-CNAME is invalid)?
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2181.txt
10.3. MX and NS records
The domain name used as the value of a NS resource record, or part of
the value
9 matches
Mail list logo
