Slightly OT: BIND problem

Paul Civati paul at xciv.org
Wed Nov 7 23:23:16 GMT 2001


Scott Mitchell <scott.mitchell at mail.com> wrote:

> The 2k server thinks that it's maintaining the reverse map for the
> various 10.1.x/24 blocks it's responsible for.  Indeed, if you ask
> it about those it gives the right answers.  Trouble is that the
> OpenBSD boxes don't want to ask it -- they just say "we don't know"

Right.. because the BSD boxes think they are authoritative for the
reverse for those blocks.

> named.conf makes it primary for 10.1/16.  I *thought* that should
> allow me to delegate the various 10.1.x/24 ranges to another server

Yes, you should be able to do this, and you're delegation looks
correct.  You'll have to do some lookups with host and dig to
find out why it's not seeing the NT delegated zone.

> -- presumably this is what our ISP has done with the "real" class
> C block that we're happily serving the reverse lookups for.

I would expect so, I think the CNAME PTR hack is only really needed
for delegating smaller than /24 blocks.

-Paul-




More information about the Ukfreebsd mailing list