but getting rndc: 'addzone' failed: permission denied, nothing on the logs,
only received control channel command 'addzone zone.local { type slave;
file slaves/zone.local; masters { 172.31.199.154; }; };' even after rndc
trace 99.
allow-new-zones yes;
tried with chmod 777 for /var/named,
It is Selinux related
Try ausearch -m avc for finding. Put named in permissive mode
Best
Il 12/gen/2014 00:13 Georgy Goshin georgy.gos...@gmail.com ha scritto:
Hi,
CentOS, 6.5, default bind package bind-9.8.2-0.17.rc1.el6_4.6.x86_64.
trying to add slave zone with command rndc addzone
Selinux disabled, /var/named/slave is 770 and owned by named. Is there a
way to get any debug output to see which permission is denied?
12.01.2014 11:40 пользователь Elia Pinto dns.spi...@gmail.com написал:
It is Selinux related
Try ausearch -m avc for finding. Put named in permissive mode
On 12/01/14 12:17, Georgy Goshin wrote:
Selinux disabled, /var/named/slave is 770 and owned by named. Is there a
It should go without saying that wholesale disabling of SELinux, if your
distro enables it by default, is unwise. If you must, set the specific
daemon to disabled.
We run with
I slaved the root zone without a file statement in my named.conf for the
slaved file and it worked. I added the file statement later to my
named.con as I wanted a local copy for quicker startup. I think I may
have touched the file to get it started though. When I finally looked at
it, I
On Jan 11 2014, Joseph S D Yao wrote:
[...snip...]
(2) There is no requirement that a domain name refer to the Web site
for that domain. I personally don't like that (for no special reason),
and neither apparently does the owner of this domain, who forces people
to go to the trouble of
named -g too shows only received command and do not shows which permission
is denied
12-Jan-2014 19:42:48.133 received control channel command 'addzone
zone.local { type slave; file slaves/zone.local; masters {
172.31.199.154; }; };'
12-Jan-2014 19:43:05.826 received control channel command
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014, Georgy Goshin wrote:
named -g too shows only received command and do not shows which permission
is denied
12-Jan-2014 19:42:48.133 received control channel command 'addzone
zone.local { type slave; file slaves/zone.local; masters {
172.31.199.154; }; };'
12-Jan-2014
Howdy,
Without going into too much detail, doing some performance testing and
am seeing a weird result. On the same systems authoritative queries will
happily peg the CPU. However when running recursive queries (with a
small zone, all data cached before testing) the CPU never gets above
80%.
Wild guess: network bandwidth runs out before CPU? Why the difference, I
have no clue.
On 13/01/14 02.16, Doug Barton wrote:
Howdy,
Without going into too much detail, doing some performance testing and
am seeing a weird result. On the same systems authoritative queries
will happily peg the
Thanks for the response, but that's not it. The auth-only responses are
generating a lot more traffic than the recursive.
Doug
On 01/12/2014 05:21 PM, Sten Carlsen wrote:
Wild guess: network bandwidth runs out before CPU? Why the difference, I
have no clue.
On 13/01/14 02.16, Doug Barton
Are you allowing long answers when authoritative? Performance measurements
with and without additional data in responses is measurable (imo around 12%
more network traffic from the replies on auth-only servers).
hth,
Len
On Sunday, January 12, 2014 5:54 PM, Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us
Thanks for the response, but you're answering a different question than
I asked. :) The question I'm interested in is, Why is the recursive
server not pegging the CPU? I'm aware that there will be a difference
in qps between auth-only and recursive, but the recursive server seems
to be
It is trying to create a .nzf (new zone file) file in the working
directory.
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
___
Please visit
Wouldn't it be something along the lines about recursive using cache-in-memory
where the authoritative is using lookups of zone-in-memory?
The algorithms are probably different. I've not looked at the code though.
Stuart
-Original Message-
From:
In article mailman.2014.1389579103.20661.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us wrote:
Thanks for the response, but you're answering a different question than
I asked. :) The question I'm interested in is, Why is the recursive
server not pegging the CPU? I'm aware that
On 01/12/2014 07:30 PM, Barry Margolin wrote:
In article mailman.2014.1389579103.20661.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
Doug Barton do...@dougbarton.us wrote:
Thanks for the response, but you're answering a different question than
I asked. :) The question I'm interested in is, Why is the recursive
Mark, I've read the phrase a lot ) What't is the working directory for
named in Centos 6 installation? I already tried to chmod 777 /var/named
/etc/named /usr/lib64/bind...
2014/1/13 Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org
It is trying to create a .nzf (new zone file) file in the working
directory.
--
18 matches
Mail list logo
