Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> Le 29/12/2017 à 18:27, Andrew W a écrit :
>>
>> On 27/12/2017 13:18, Bernhard Schmidt wrote:
>>> Current BIND9 defaults to doing DNSSEC verification. DNSSEC needs large
>>> packets. You might have an issue with UDP fragments being dropped at
>>> your firewall/NAT Gateway?
Le 29/12/2017 à 18:27, Andrew W a écrit :
On 27/12/2017 13:18, Bernhard Schmidt wrote:
Current BIND9 defaults to doing DNSSEC verification. DNSSEC needs large
packets. You might have an issue with UDP fragments being dropped at
your firewall/NAT Gateway?
Thanks for this tip. Looking into it I
On 27/12/2017 13:18, Bernhard Schmidt wrote:
Current BIND9 defaults to doing DNSSEC verification. DNSSEC needs large
packets. You might have an issue with UDP fragments being dropped at
your firewall/NAT Gateway?
Thanks for this tip. Looking into it I discovered TCP seems to be
recommened fo
Andrew Wood wrote:
Hi,
> I have a server which acts as a DNS server for our LAN. All our internal
> servers have A records on it using a .local domain and it forwards all
> other requests out to the root servers using the in built list provided
> with BIND. All clients on the LAN have this ma
Andrew W wrote:
>
>
> Does anyone have any ideas please?
>
I had the same experience - I think (after trying this and that) the
solution was ntp (time was behind on the server), but I am not really 100%.
I was thinking first it has something to do with ipv6 or firewall, but after
updating the
I have a server which acts as a DNS server for our LAN. All our internal
servers have A records on it using a .local domain and it forwards all
other requests out to the root servers using the in built list provided
with BIND. All clients on the LAN have this machine set as their only
DNS serve
I have a server which acts as a DNS server for our LAN. All our internal
servers have A records on it using a .local domain and it forwards all
other requests out to the root servers using the in built list provided
with BIND. All clients on the LAN have this machine set as their only
DNS serve
On 2010-08-06 10:01 +0200, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
> With
>
> nfs:/home /home nfs defaults0 0
>
> in /etc/fstab I get
>
> mount.nfs: Failed to resolve server nfs: Temporary failure in name resolution
>
> on boot. This is because I use local bind9 and /etc/reso
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 15:22:19 +0300, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
> Camaleón writes:
>> So we are doing something wrong here.
>
> It seems that /etc/init.d/mountnfs.sh does not actually call mount, it
> is done by
>
> /etc/network/if-up.d/mountnfs
>
> when a network interface is brought up.
>
>
Timo Juhani Lindfors writes:
> Should I try starting bind9 before network is brought up? That sounds
> very counter-intuitive.
Replying to myself here: this fails since bind9 says "no networks
configured". A hack that works for now seems to be to add
if [ "$(pidof named)" = "" ]; then
/etc/i
Camaleón writes:
> So we are doing something wrong here.
It seems that /etc/init.d/mountnfs.sh does not actually call mount, it
is done by
/etc/network/if-up.d/mountnfs
when a network interface is brought up.
Should I try starting bind9 before network is brought up? That sounds
very counter-in
Camaleón writes:
> Did you read the manual or the docs for insserv? Maybe we are missing some
> step to fully populate the new boot sequence :-?
I did try but the man page does not really mention when symlinks are
created. For example
$ echo /etc/rc*/*bind9
/etc/rc0.d/K02bind9 /etc/rc1.d/K02bin
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 12:52:11 +0300, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
> Camaleón writes:
>> $named bind9
>
> Thanks for the effort but this does not seem to be enough:
>
> $ grep -Ev "(^#|^$)" /etc/insserv.conf
(...)
> $named +named +dnsmasq +lwresd bind9 $network
> $remote_fs
Camaleón writes:
> $namedbind9
Thanks for the effort but this does not seem to be enough:
$ grep -Ev "(^#|^$)" /etc/insserv.conf
$local_fs +mountall +mountoverflowtmp +umountfs
$network+networking +ifupdown
$named +named +dnsmasq +lwresd bind9 $network
$remote_fs
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 11:01:01 +0300, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
(...)
> I tried adding " bind9" to the $remote_fs line of /etc/insserv.conf but
> got
>
> $ sudo insserv --dryrun
> insserv: There is a loop between service bind9 and rsyslog if started
> insserv: loop involving service rsyslog at
With
nfs:/home /home nfs defaults0 0
in /etc/fstab I get
mount.nfs: Failed to resolve server nfs: Temporary failure in name resolution
on boot. This is because I use local bind9 and /etc/resolv.conf has
nameserver 127.0.0.1
I tried adding " bind9" to the $rem
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:54:39 -0800
"Brian C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a single machine running BIND and Apache. I've never used
> either before. I've just upgraded this box from stable to testing. I
> have never been able to get the web site to show up using its domain
> name. I can typ
Hi,
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Brian C wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a single machine running BIND and Apache. I've never used either
> before. I've just upgraded this box from stable to testing. I have never
> been able to get the web site to show up using its domain name. I can type
> my static IP address
Hi,
I have a single machine running BIND and Apache. I've never used either
before. I've just upgraded this box from stable to testing. I have never
been able to get the web site to show up using its domain name. I can type
my static IP address into a web browser and it will show up, and I jus
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 09:22:54PM -0500, Matthew Daubenspeck wrote:
> Does anyone have a down and dirty, current and quick HOWTO on setting up
> BIND for a few domain names?
Check out the DNS-HOWTO. It goes into a lot if theory up front, and
you really should read that part, but you'd probably
Feb 13, 2002 @09:22:54PM -0500, Matthew Daubenspeck posts :
> Does anyone have a down and dirty, current and quick HOWTO on setting
> up BIND for a few domain names ?
Not dirty anyway, bind9 specific
http://cvs.linuxfromscratch.org/index.cgi/~checkout~/hints/bind.txt?rev=1.3&content-type=te
Does anyone have a down and dirty, current and quick HOWTO on setting up
BIND for a few domain names?
22 matches
Mail list logo
