Re: Multiple masters for slave zone

2013-03-18 Thread Dave Warren
On 2013-03-18 23:12, Steven Carr wrote: On 18 March 2013 23:08, Dave Warren wrote: Does it actually check each master for a serial number, or does it stop at the first one queried if it has a higher-than-current serial number? It would have to otherwise how would it know who has the highest an

Re: Multiple masters for slave zone

2013-03-18 Thread Steven Carr
On 18 March 2013 23:08, Dave Warren wrote: > Does it actually check each master for a serial number, or does it stop at > the first one queried if it has a higher-than-current serial number? It would have to otherwise how would it know who has the highest and when to stop checking. Steve ___

Re: BIND 9.8.2: forward zone not working

2013-03-18 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <5147d5ae.5050...@verizon.net>, Gerry Reno writes: > If it was more than just a few labels I would do it another way. > > But this will suffice, if I can only get bind to actually get the forward zon > e working. > > I don't need any delegation. I'm not looking to slave the zone. >

Re: BIND 9.8.2: forward zone not working

2013-03-18 Thread Gerry Reno
On 03/18/2013 10:25 PM, b...@bitrate.net wrote: > On Mar 18, 2013, at 20.27, Gerry Reno wrote: > >> Using BIND 9.8.2 >> >> When you setup Samba 4 AD DC using BIND9_DLZ and your domain has external >> servers (eg: www,mail) at external providers >> this means that the ISP and the internal network

Re: spf ent txt records.

2013-03-18 Thread Noel Butler
On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 16:52 -0700, SM wrote: > SPF RR type Had a bit of a read of that thread, and the most noise comes from a guy who should know better, but doesn't, Mr Kitterman repeatedly says "If it's all so obvious that it makes sense to publish SPF records, why aren't more people doing

Re: BIND 9.8.2: forward zone not working

2013-03-18 Thread btb
On Mar 18, 2013, at 20.27, Gerry Reno wrote: > Using BIND 9.8.2 > > When you setup Samba 4 AD DC using BIND9_DLZ and your domain has external > servers (eg: www,mail) at external providers > this means that the ISP and the internal network nameservers will both have > SOA record for the domain

Re: BIND 9.8.2: forward zone not working

2013-03-18 Thread Gerry Reno
On 03/18/2013 08:32 PM, Drunkard Zhang wrote: > 2013/3/19 Gerry Reno : >> Using BIND 9.8.2 >> >> When you setup Samba 4 AD DC using BIND9_DLZ and your domain has external >> servers (eg: www,mail) at external providers >> this means that the ISP and the internal network nameservers will both have

Re: BIND 9.8.2: forward zone not working

2013-03-18 Thread Drunkard Zhang
2013/3/19 Gerry Reno : > Using BIND 9.8.2 > > When you setup Samba 4 AD DC using BIND9_DLZ and your domain has external > servers (eg: www,mail) at external providers > this means that the ISP and the internal network nameservers will both have > SOA record for the domain. > > /etc/resolv.conf lo

BIND 9.8.2: forward zone not working

2013-03-18 Thread Gerry Reno
Using BIND 9.8.2 When you setup Samba 4 AD DC using BIND9_DLZ and your domain has external servers (eg: www,mail) at external providers this means that the ISP and the internal network nameservers will both have SOA record for the domain. /etc/resolv.conf looks like this: domain company.co

Re: spf ent txt records.

2013-03-18 Thread SM
At 08:35 18-03-2013, Vernon Schryver wrote: Also, those who are not lazy, who think RFC 4408bis is wrong, and want to use type 99 without violating RFC 4408bis will go to the IEFF. I suggest reading the messages with a subject line of "#9: RFC 4408 SPF RR type" in the mail archive at http://w

Re: spf ent txt records.

2013-03-18 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <201303181535.r2ifz8ga017...@calcite.rhyolite.com>, Vernon Schryver writes: > } Turning off lookup for TXT record lookup for SPF would have very > } little negative impact. You would have some additional spoofed > } email getting through and some additional blow back (which could > }

Re: Multiple masters for slave zone

2013-03-18 Thread Dave Warren
On 2013-03-18 15:50, Mark Andrews wrote: Named will transfer from the master with the highest serial. Notify just triggers early refresh checks. Does it actually check each master for a serial number, or does it stop at the first one queried if it has a higher-than-current serial number? I'

Re: Multiple masters for slave zone

2013-03-18 Thread Mark Andrews
In message , Emil Natan writes: > > It does not matter where the notify comes from (it well can be sent from a > slave too), named will try to transfer the zone from the first master > listed in the masters list. At least it's how it works in 9.7.x, though I > do not believe it's something that

Re: spf ent txt records.

2013-03-18 Thread Dave Warren
On 2013-03-17 22:35, Doug Barton wrote: On 3/17/2013 5:59 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: The rational course would be to set a sunset date on TXT style spf records. April 2016 looks like a good date. 10 years after RFC 4408 was published. +1 Unfortunately there's really no need to change behaviou

Re: spf ent txt records.

2013-03-18 Thread Vernon Schryver
> > I'd go along with that, if they can't get their act together within 3 > > years, then that IS pure laziness. I think "laziness" better fits answering port 443 with HTTP/TLS-SSL and not publishing DANE RRs with existing certs or fingerprints. The contrib/dane directory in current versions of BI

Re: Multiple masters for slave zone

2013-03-18 Thread Emil Natan
It does not matter where the notify comes from (it well can be sent from a slave too), named will try to transfer the zone from the first master listed in the masters list. At least it's how it works in 9.7.x, though I do not believe it's something that changed between the releases. ena On Mon, M

Re: spf ent txt records.

2013-03-18 Thread nudge dread
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013, at 03:19 AM, Noel Butler wrote: > > > Vernon Schryver writes: > > > > > to laziness, DNS is not rocket science, I'm sure given ARM and > > access to > > > > google, a 13yo kid could get at least the "basics" right. > > > > > > Laziness?--nonsense. Postel's Law and simple l