Follow up to (bug?) : Strange Bind9 behavior.

From: Account for Debian group mail (debian_at_pcez.com)
Date: 11/08/05

  • Next message: Josh Battles: "Re: Editing the Fluxbox menu?"
    Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 11:20:12 -0800 (PST)
    To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
    
    

    I figured out what the problem was. I had put in my bind9 option area the
    statement: (numbers missing to protect the innocent.)
            allow-recursion {
                  209.102.xxx.xx;
                  209.102.xxx.xx;
            };

    To allow 2 mail servers to do recursion to this name server. This seem to
    cause the problem. When I removed the 2 mail servers and put in this
    statement:
            allow-recursion {
                 any;
            };
    It started working again.

    Then the name server when queried on the name server machine, ie. dig
    bozo.com 127.0.0.1, could query it self and get a reply even though the
    URL was not cached on that machine. Before this change all I could query
    was what was in the name server cache. Maybe you need to put in the
    127.0.0.1 address in the allow-recursion statement as well?

    This seems like a bug to me.

    Ken Rea

    On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Account for Debian group mail wrote:

    >
    > I'm getting a strange behavior (for me anyway...) on Bind9. I just set up
    > a new Debian Sarge server with bind9. Anyway, I can do a dig lookup on a
    > domain name from this new server using 127.0.0.1 (# dig bozo.com 127.0.0.1)
    > and it will not find the address. Then I can go to another server and
    > direct the dig at the new server and it will find this address. Then I go
    > back to the new server where I could not resolve that same address in the
    > first place and now it will resolve it.
    >
    > I can resolve any address from the new server as long as another server
    > has already looked it up from this new server.
    >
    > Any Ideas? BTW there is no firewall involved.
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Ken Rea
    >
    >
    > --
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
    >

    -- 
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
    

  • Next message: Josh Battles: "Re: Editing the Fluxbox menu?"

    Relevant Pages

    • DNS resolution problem on certain addresses using BIND 9
      ... I have two domains that named cannot resolve. ... Both the host command and a simple dig on the names only yields a ";; ... If I point dig to the address's name server, ... address resolves correction. ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: Fetchmail error 451 4.1.8 in slack9
      ... sendmail is not able to resolve a valid IP address. ... > dig hongkong.com ... hongkong.com name server ns2.hongkong.com. ... $ dig @localhost hongkong.com mx ...
      (comp.os.linux.misc)
    • Re: BIND not resolving some addresses
      ... doing a dig on eweek.com it takes ages and eventually ... Even though my dns server can resolve eweek.com, ... Ever since I ran bind on redhat 7.3, it has never resolved that domain name for me: ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: Nameserver Problem Revisited -
      ... ;; global options: printcmd ... @address of DNS server to query, as well as other options can be ... dig example.com @127.0.0.1 ... Asks the name server at 127.0.0.1 to resolve example.com ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: DNS not responding
      ... > After looking at the results of your dig, it looks as though you were able ... > to resolve something using the server at 12.159.185.248. ... Jack Bowling mailto: jbinpg@shaw.ca -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe ...
      (RedHat)