Re: [CentOS] Simple Question about Resolving Names without suffix with bind

2007-07-08 Thread Wei Yu
Yes, it works. The DNS search suffix matters. Thank you all! On 7/8/07, Steven Haigh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 08/07/2007, at 1:24 PM, Gregory P. Ennis wrote: On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 12:58 +0800, Wei Yu wrote: Hi I am trying to use Bind as named. And I have successfully set up a

Re: [CentOS] Simple Question about Resolving Names without suffix with bind

2007-07-07 Thread Steven Haigh
On 08/07/2007, at 1:24 PM, Gregory P. Ennis wrote: On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 12:58 +0800, Wei Yu wrote: Hi I am trying to use Bind as named. And I have successfully set up a chrooted bind. Anyway, I cannot have it resolve www directly. For example, when I am using nslookup, when enter

[CentOS] Simple Question about Resolving Names without suffix with bind

2007-07-06 Thread Wei Yu
Hi I am trying to use Bind as named. And I have successfully set up a chrooted bind. Anyway, I cannot have it resolve www directly. For example, when I am using nslookup, when enter www.example.com, it will resolve. But when enter www, it will not. I want to have www resolve to

Re: [CentOS] Simple Question about Resolving Names without suffix with bind

2007-07-06 Thread Garrick Staples
On Sat, Jul 07, 2007 at 12:58:03PM +0800, Wei Yu alleged: Hi I am trying to use Bind as named. And I have successfully set up a chrooted bind. Anyway, I cannot have it resolve www directly. For example, when I am using nslookup, when enter www.example.com, it will resolve. But when