On 2023-06-02 05:02, Jesus Cea wrote:
On 2/6/23 4:25, Mark Andrews wrote:
Yep, some people just don’t take care with delegations. Complain to
Huawei.
Complain to the other companies you list in your followup email.
All it takes to fix this is to change the name of the zone on the
child ser
Le 07/07/2023 à 11:57, Jakob Bohm via bind-users a écrit :
On 2023-06-02 05:02, Jesus Cea wrote:
On 2/6/23 4:25, Mark Andrews wrote:
Yep, some people just don’t take care with delegations. Complain to
Huawei.
Complain to the other companies you list in your followup email.
All it takes to
On 2023-07-07 12:17, Emmanuel Fusté wrote:
Le 07/07/2023 à 11:57, Jakob Bohm via bind-users a écrit :
On 2023-06-02 05:02, Jesus Cea wrote:
On 2/6/23 4:25, Mark Andrews wrote:
Yep, some people just don’t take care with delegations. Complain
to Huawei.
Complain to the other companies you li
You are wrong if you think the SOA record is only informal. It’s not, see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2308 for more details.
Then
> In a similar way, bind should not object to the SOA mail contect being valid,
> as a surprising number of zones actually fail to handle mail to that address
Am 05.07.2023 um 13:13 schrieb Matthias Fechner:
So far, nsdiff generates expected output, next step is now to apply
the changes in an automated way.
If I try now to update some records remotely on the server I see in the
log of the server:
==> /var/named/var/log/named.log <==
08-Jul-2023 0
5 matches
Mail list logo