The issue with the dlv.isc.org DNSSEC signatures yesterday (2020/03/25)
was caused by an undetected failure to restore the virtual machine that
runs the hidden master for that zone following a failed upgrade to the
underlying hypervisor.
As a result of this issue the internet facing servers were u
I reported a bug with the requested details:
https://gitlab.isc.org/isc-projects/bind9/issues/1706
A related thing that I've noticed in my tests is that "dnssec-policy x"
seems to also imply "inline-signing yes"?
Is this intended as a strict requirement, it seems a little awkward?
On that no
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 3:35 PM Håkan Lindqvist via bind-users <
bind-users@lists.isc.org> wrote:
>
> A related thing that I've noticed in my tests is that "dnssec-policy x"
> seems to also imply "inline-signing yes"?
> Is this intended as a strict requirement, it seems a little awkward?
>
I'm su
dnssec-policy should be independent of inline-signing. If it isn’t then it is
a bug.
It just people like editing master files rather than using nsupdate to make
changes.
> On 27 Mar 2020, at 08:02, Shumon Huque wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 3:35 PM Håkan Lindqvist via bind-users
> wro
On 2020-03-26 23:00, Mark Andrews wrote:
dnssec-policy should be independent of inline-signing. If it isn’t then it is
a bug.
It just people like editing master files rather than using nsupdate to make
changes.
Ok, thank you for clarifying what should be expected.
I guess that leaves the q
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 7:27 PM Håkan Lindqvist via bind-users <
bind-users@lists.isc.org> wrote:
> On 2020-03-26 23:00, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > dnssec-policy should be independent of inline-signing. If it isn’t then
> it is a bug.
> >
> > It just people like editing master files rather than usin
6 matches
Mail list logo
