Search Results

Search found 245 results on 10 pages for 'authoritative'.

Page 2/10 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  | Next Page >

• Point dns server to root dns servers [duplicate]

  - by Dhaksh

  This question already has an answer here: What is a glue record? 3 answers Why does DNS work the way it does? 4 answers I have setup a custom authoritative only DNS server using bind9. Its a Master ans Slave method. Assume DNS Servers are: ns1.customdnsserver.com [192.168.91.129] ==> Master ns2.customdnsserver.com [192.168.91.130] ==> Slave Now i will host few shared hosting websites in my own web server. Where i will link above Nameservers to my domains in shared hosting. My Question is: How do i tell root DNS servers about my own authoritative only DNS server? So that when someone queries for domain www.example.com and if the domain's website is hosted in my shared hosting i want root servers to point the query to my own DNS Server so that the www.example.com get resolved for IP address.

  Read the article

• Doesn't DNS diversity negatively affect performance? Why/how?

  - by cnst

  If you look at the press releases of various orgs that run the internet, you can see them praise the fact that now they run root server X in city Y, as if that magically makes everyone in city Y get all the relevant resolutions from the local server X, instead of going 200ms across the oceans and lands to other continents for resolutions. Similarly, the zones of some geographical domain names, like .ru, are being mirrored not just within Europe, but also, for example, in Hong Kong, which is no more, no less, but is about 300ms away from central Europe, since the traffic is often crossing the two oceans on each way. Doesn't all of this negatively affect DNS performance? Isn't it more of a liability to have a diverse pool of geodispersed authoritative servers, especially if your target audience is quite geographically concentrated? Perhaps a better question is, are there any DNS resolvers that use something better than the naive round-robin for choosing which authoritative server to contact?

  Read the article

• nslookup gives wrong ip for my domain

  - by Werulz

  I am having some problem in trying to setup DNS for my domain on my server. This tutorial normally works fine for me but when i tried to lookup my domain it gives the following output Server: 4.2.2.1 Address: 4.2.2.1#53 Non-authoritative answer: 119.100.79.64.in-addr.arpa name = server.leech4ever.com. Authoritative answers can be found from: The server and the address are wrong according to the tutorial Here is tutorial http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:rR7Z4YU4GI0J:www.broexperts.com/2012/03/linux-dns-bind-configuration-on-centos-6-2/+broexperts+bind&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=mu /etc/hosts 127.0.0.1 localhost 64.79.100.119 server.leech4ever.com server /etc/resolve.conf search leech4ever.com nameserver 64.79.100.119 /etc/resolv.conf nameserver 4.2.2.1 nameserver 4.2.2.2 How to solve this problem guys.....The tutorial was flawless until i did a server restore

  Read the article

• Why is BIND giving me a SERVFAIL in this case? (Notes inside)

  - by imaginative

  Woke up this morning to a bunch of the following: root@foo:/etc/bind# dig @1.2.3.4 foo.example.com ; <<>> DiG 9.6.1-P2 <<>> @1.2.3.4 foo.example.com ; (1 server found) ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 36121 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;;foo.example.com. IN A ;; Query time: 0 msec ;; SERVER: 1.2.3.4#53(1.2.3.4) ;; WHEN: Thu Apr 1 09:57:59 2010 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 31 Some background on the fictitious "1.2.3.4". It's a slave name server in my nameserver "farm". Technically I have ns1 (being the master) and ns2/ns3. Currently ns1/ns2 are down for maintenance, so I left ns3 at it serving live traffic. That's the point, DNS is supposed to be resilient. Now the odd part is, "1.2.3.4" was serving requests for example.com just fine for the last 4-5 days. This morning I get a phone call that it's non-responsive. After investigation I see the message you see above, SERVFAIL. I looked into the zone file and saw the following: example.com IN SOA ns1.example.com. hostmaster.mail.example.com. ( I wondered if at this point that the nameserver thought it was not authoritative over example.com and adjusted it to the following: example.com IN SOA ns3.example.com. hostmaster.mail.example.com. ( After that, it started responding again for all authoritative queries for example.com. I have no idea why. I thought these things were supposed to be normalized upon zone transfer from ns1 - ns3? Can someone please example why this happened and how to prevent it from happening in the future? I've never had a similar problem, and because I don't understand it well, I might be missing some critical information in this question. So please let me know if I can further add any detail to make things clearer as well. One more thing to note: I have other domains that I'm authoritative for that have their SOA still saying ns1.example.com. and not ns3.example.com. Those domains are serving requests just fine! Is it a matter of time before they stop also and I have to change SOA to ns3.example.com? Is this also only required because ns1 and ns2 are currently offline?

  Read the article

• Multiplayer approach for tablets on wi-fi (FPS/TPS)? Server authority, etc

  - by Fraggle

  Looking for some guidance or what has worked well for others in implementing a multiplayer FPS/TPS type game on tablets (probably just 2-6 players at a time). The main issue being that tablets/phones are typically "less" connected than say a console or pc might be. And therefore, my thought is that to have complete Server authority of everything is not going to work. But maybe I'm off base on that. So I guess I'm struggling with what (if anything) should happen on a central server and what should happen locally. Or is centralized approach even needed? Some approaches I might do: Player movement : my thought is to control this locally (player-owner) and update server with positon (which then sends out to other clients). Use client side prediction for opponent players so that connection loss will not show a plane for example stop in mid air. Server will send update and try to smoothly correct an opponent player position to server updated one.But don't update owners position on owners device from server. Powerups (health kit/ammo/coins/etc) : need to see them disappear immediately, so do it locally. Add the health locally, but perhaps allow for server correction. If server doesn't see player near that powerup, reject the powerup and adjust server health for player. Fire weapons: Have to see it happen right away, so fire locally, create local bullet and send on its way. Send rpc to server so that this player on other clients also fires. Hit detection: Get's trickier. Make bullet/projectile disappear locally, and perhaps perform local hit animations (shaking, whatever). non-authoritative approach= take the damage locally and send rpc to server or others to update health and inform of hit. Authoritative approach-Don't take the damage, or adjust health. Server will do that if it detects a hit. Anyway that's my current thought stream. Let me know what you think of the above or what has worked for you.

  Read the article

• How do I join two git repos without a common root, where all modified files are the same?

  - by Evan Carroll

  I have a git-cpan-init of a repo which yielded a different root node from another already established git repo I found on github C:A:S:DBI. I've developed quite a bit on my repo, and I'd like to merge or replay my edits on a fork of the more authoritative repository. Does anyone know how to do this? I think it is safe to assume none of the file-contents of the modified files are different -- the code base hasn't been since Nov 08'. For clarity the git hub repo is the authoritative one. My local repo is the one I want to go up to git hub shown as a real git fork.

  Read the article

• SCOM 2012 DNS Forwarder Availability Monitor

  - by Massimo

  Background: I have an environment with two different AD domains, each in its own forest, each with two Windows Server 2008 R2 domain controllers acting as DNS servers. There is no trust between the domains. Each DNS server manages the main DNS zone for its AD domain, and then some other zones, including the reverse lookup zone for its IP subnets; all zones are AD-integrated; all DNS servers which manages a zone are correctly listed as authoritative name servers for that zone. So, the situation is like this (using fake names and IP addresses): Domain A: DNS domain: a.dom IP subnet: 192.168.1.X DC/DNS Servers: serverA1.a.dom (192.168.1.1) and serverA2.a.dom (192.168.1.2) Authoritative zones: a.dom, 1.168.192.in-addr.arpa, somezone.local Domain B: DNS domain: b.dom IP subnet: 10.0.0.X DC/DNS Servers: serverB1.b.dom (10.0.0.1) and serverB2.b.dom (10.0.0.2) Authoritative zones: b.dom, 0.0.10.in-addr.arpa, someotherzone.local DNS servers in domain A have conditional forwarders defined for each zone managed by DNS servers in domain B, forwarding to both domain B's DNS servers; DNS servers in domain B have the opposite configuration. All forwarders are stored in Active Directory. All is working perfectly, and computers in each domain can resolve forward and reverse DNS queries for both domains, using their domain's DNS servers. The problem: I have SCOM 2012 deployed in domain A, with the SCOM agent installed on both DCs; the management packs for Active Directory and DNS Server are installed and up-to-date. I have a series of alerts like the following ones on both domain controllers; each alert is generated for each forwarded zone and for each forwarded server: Forwarder someotherzone.local (10.0.0.1) cannot resolve the host name 192.168.1.1,someotherzone.local for serverA1.a.dom Forwarder someotherzone.local (10.0.0.2) cannot resolve the host name 192.168.1.1,someotherzone.local for serverA1.a.dom Forwarder someotherzone.local (10.0.0.1) cannot resolve the host name 192.168.1.2,someotherzone.local for serverA2.a.dom Forwarder someotherzone.local (10.0.0.2) cannot resolve the host name 192.168.1.2,someotherzone.local for serverA2.a.dom Forwarder 0.0.10.in-addr.arpa (10.0.0.1) cannot resolve the host name 192.168.1.1,0.0.10.in-addr.arpa for serverA1.a.dom Forwarder 0.0.10.in-addr.arpa (10.0.0.2) cannot resolve the host name 192.168.1.1,0.0.10.in-addr.arpa for serverA1.a.dom Forwarder 0.0.10.in-addr.arpa (10.0.0.1) cannot resolve the host name 192.168.1.2,0.0.10.in-addr.arpa for serverA2.a.dom Forwarder 0.0.10.in-addr.arpa (10.0.0.2) cannot resolve the host name 192.168.1.2,0.0.10.in-addr.arpa for serverA2.a.dom The only exception is the main AD DNS zone managed by domain B's DNS servers (b.dom): for that conditional forwarder, no alert is generated and the forwarder availability monitor is green. Ok, what does this mean? What are those monitors trying to tell me? What are they checking? What's actually wrong? And why there is no error for the "b.dom" zone, which is configured in the exact same way as the other ones, both as a zone in domain B's DNS servers and as a forwarder in domain A's DNS servers?

  Read the article

• Moved DNS and Email Hosting, Now Can't Send/Receive To/From Domains Hosted on Previous Host

  - by maxfinis

  Our company had 4 domains whose emails and DNS were hosted by one company, and then we moved the email and DNS hosting for 3 of the 4 domains to a new company. Now, the 3 domains that were moved can't send or receive emails to and from the one domain still left on the old server. All other email functions work fine for all 4 domains. There are no bouncebacks, error messages, or emails stuck in queue, and no evidence of these missing emails hitting the new servers. The new hosting company confirms that everything is fine on their end, and assures me that it's most likely an old zone file still remaining on the old nameserver, and so the emails sent from the old host is routed to what it believes is still the authoritative nameserver. Because the old zone file's MX records still contain the old resource, the requests never leave the old nameserver to go online to do a fresh search for the real (new) authoritative nameserver. The compounding problem is that the old company is rather inept and doesn't seem to have the technical expertise to identify the problem, much less fix it. (I know, I know.) Is the problem truly that this old zone file just needs to be deleted from the old company's nameserver? If so, what's the best way for me to describe this to them? If not, what do you think could be the issue? Any help is much appreciated. I'm not in IT, so all this is new to me. I know it seems weird for me (the client) to have to do this legwork, but I just want to get this resolved. Here's what I've done: Ran dig to verify that the old server's MX records still point to the old authoritative server, instead of going online to do a fresh search: ~$ dig @old.nameserver.com domainthatwasmoved.com mx ; << DiG 9.6.0-APPLE-P2 << @old.nameserver.com domainThatWasMoved.com mx ; (1 server found) ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 61227 ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;domainthatwasmoved.com. IN MX ;; ANSWER SECTION: domainthatwasmoved.com. 3600 IN MX 10 mail.oldmailserver.com. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: mail.oldmailserver.com. 3600 IN A 65.198.191.5 ;; Query time: 29 msec ;; SERVER: 65.198.191.5#53(65.198.191.5) ;; WHEN: Sun Dec 26 16:59:22 2010 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 88 Ran dig to try to see where the new hosting company's servers look when emails are sent from the 3 domains that were moved, and got refused: ~$ dig @new.nameserver.net domainStillAtOldHost.com mx ; << DiG 9.6.0-APPLE-P2 << @new.nameserver.net domainStillAtOldHost.com mx ; (1 server found) ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; -HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: REFUSED, id: 31599 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;domainStillAtOldHost.com. IN MX ;; Query time: 31 msec ;; SERVER: 216.201.128.10#53(216.201.128.10) ;; WHEN: Sun Dec 26 17:00:14 2010 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 34

  Read the article

• Data Governance 2010 Conference in San Diego

  - by Tony Ouk

  The Data Governance Annual Conference is one of the world's most authoritative and vendor neutral event on Data Governance and Data Quality.  The conference will focus on the "how-tos" from starting a data governance and stewardship program to attaining data governance maturity with specific topics on MDM.  This year's event will be hosted June 7 through June 10 in San Diego, California. For more information, including registration details, visit the Data Governance 2010 Conference website.

  Read the article

• How to prevent a hacked-server from spoofing a master server?

  - by Cody Smith

  I wish to setup a room-based multilayer game model where players may host matches and serve as host (IE the server with authoritative power). I wish to host a master server which tracks player's items, rank, cash, exp, etc. In such a model, how can I prevent someone that is hosting a game (with a modified server) from spoofing the master server with invalid match results, thus gaining exp, money or rankings. Thanks. -Cody

  Read the article

• Installing PowerDNS (With MySQL Backend) And Poweradmin On Ubuntu 9.10

  <b>Howtoforge:</b> "This article shows how you can install the PowerDNS nameserver (with MySQL backend) and the Poweradmin control panel for PowerDNS on an Ubuntu 9.10 system. PowerDNS is a high-performance, authoritative-only nameserver"

  Read the article

• mulktiple domain names and site behind one ipaddress/gateway

  - by RandomOzzy

  looking to host a handful of sites for myself, family and a couple of friends. i'm running ubuntu 14.04, with a bind9 authoritative name server, apache2, mysql, php5, postfix/dovecot... i have everything running with a single domain i'm already paying for. looking to run multiple sites, some with their own domains, with out having to pay for more ip address's or 3rd party services, other then the individual dns names. thanks andrew

  Read the article

• Movement prediction for non-shooters

  - by ShadowChaser

  I'm working on an isometric (2D) game with moderate-scale multiplayer - 20-30 players. I've had some difficulty getting a good movement prediction implementation in place. Right now, clients are authoritative for their own position. The server performs validation and broad-scale cheat detection, and I fully realize that the system will never be fully robust against cheating. However, the performance and implementation tradeoffs work well for me right now. Given that I'm dealing with sprite graphics, the game has 8 defined directions rather than free movement. Whenever the player changes their direction or speed (walk, run, stop), a "true" 3D velocity is set on the entity and a packet it sent to the server with the new movement state. In addition, every 250ms additional packets are transmitted with the player's current position for state updates on the server as well as for client prediction. After the server validates the packet, it gets automatically distributed to all of the other "nearby" players. Client-side, all entities with non-zero velocity (ie/ moving entities) are tracked and updated by a rudimentary "physics" system - basically nothing more than changing the position by the velocity according to the elapsed time slice (40ms or so). What I'm struggling with is how to implement clean movement prediction. I have the nagging suspicion that I've made a design mistake somewhere. I've been over the Unreal, Half-life, and all other movement prediction/lag compensation articles I could find, but they all seam geared toward shooters: "Don't send each control change, send updates every 120ms, server is authoritative, client predicts, etc". Unfortunately, that style of design won't work well for me - there's no 3D environment so each individual state change is important. 1) Most of the samples I saw tightly couple movement prediction right into the entities themselves. For example, storing the previous state along with the current state. I'd like to avoid that and keep entities with their "current state" only. Is there a better way to handle this? 2) What should happen when the player stops? I can't interpolate to the correct position, since they might need to walk backwards or another strange direction if their position is too far ahead. 3) What should happen when entities collide? If the current player collides with something, the answer is simple - just stop the player from moving. But what happens if two entities take up the same space on the server? What if the local prediction causes a remote entity to collide with the player or another entity - do I stop them as well? If the prediction had the misfortune of sticking them in front of a wall that the player has gone around, the prediction will never be able to compensate and once the error gets to high the entity will snap to the new position.

  Read the article

• How to synchronize the ball in a network pong game?

  - by Thaars

  I’m developing a multiplayer network pong game, my first game ever. The current state is, I’ve running the physic engine with the same configurations on the server and the clients. The own paddle movement is predicted and get just confirmed by the authoritative server. Is a difference detected between them, I correct the position at the client by interpolation. The opponent paddle is also interpolated 200ms to 100ms in the past, because the server is broadcasting snapshots every 100ms to each client. So far it works very well, but now I have to simulate the ball and have a problem to understanding the procedure. I’ve read Valve’s (and many other) articles about fast-paced multiplayer several times and understood their approach. Maybe I can compare my ball with their bullets, but their advantage is, the bullets are not visible. When I have to display the ball, and see my paddle in the present, the opponent in the past and the server is somewhere between it, how can I synchronize the ball over all instances and ensure, that it got ever hit by the paddle even if the paddle is fast moving? Currently my ball’s position is simply set by a server update, so it can happen, that the ball bounces back, even if the paddle is some pixel away (because of a delayed server position). Until now I’ve got no synced clock over all instances. I’m sending a client step index with each update to the server. If the server did his job, he sends the snapshot with the last step index of each client back to the clients. Now I’m looking for the stored position at the returned step index and compare them. Do I need a common clock to sync the ball? EDIT: I've tried to sync a common clock for the server and all clients with a timestamp. But I think it's better to use an own stepping instead of a timestamp (so I don't need to calculate with the ping and so on - and the timestamp will never be exact). The physics are running 60 times per second and now I use this for keeping them synchronized. Is that a good way? When the ball gets calculated by each client, the angle after bouncing can differ because of the different position of the paddles (the opponent is 200ms in the past). When the server is sending his ball position, velocity and angle (because he knows the position of each paddle and is authoritative), the ball could be in a very different position because of the different angles after bouncing (because the clients receive the server data after 100ms). How is it possible to interpolate such a huge difference? I posted this question some days ago at stackoverflow, but got no answer yet. Maybe this is the better place for this question.

  Read the article

• Popularizing SEO Through Link Building

  The most important thing for a starting SEO site is by creating an authoritative facade that will boost confidence for the site. By this one will be committing the site into an easily accessible link with secure policies for the user such as a posting requesting the user to check out the private data protection criteria once they log on to the site.

  Read the article

• How Writing Helps in Link Building?

  Just by having an authoritative voice over a certain topic, you could easily help yourself in building links to your website. You can do this by writing how-to guides, lists, instructions and other "expert" articles.

  Read the article

• Increase Search Engine Ranking in 3 Simple Steps

  SEO is not difficult. All that is required is a basic understanding of the what goes into SEO. Generating backlinks and getting ranked well in search engines is one part of SEO and if you do that right, 95% of your work is done. Read on to know a simple way of generating high quality backlinks from authoritative websites.

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008 R2 DFSR Backlog Troubleshooting - Where to look for the cause of the problem?

  - by caleban

  Our target server indicates it has hundreds of thousands of backlogged transactions. Our authoritative source server indicates it has no backlogged transactions. No replication is taking place. Tests with plain text files aren't replicating. dfsdiag propogation tests fail to propogate. I've restarted the DFS services. I've restarted the servers. I've created new DFS shares to test with. The authoritative source server indicates it has no backlogs and the target indicates it has backlogs (which are the files it's waiting to receive). Files don't replicate in either direction. 2x Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard servers One server is at each of two sites The DFSR shares are on each respective server \site_1_server_1\users \site_2_server_1\users The sites are connected by a T1 DFSR worked for a week. I added a new share, another folder on the same servers, and that replicated for a weekend but never finished. Then all replication stopped. Is Windows DFSR flaky? What tools should I use and what should I look at to identify what's causing this problem?

  Read the article

• Cannot access certain URL on my wireless

  - by dehmann

  Problem: On my wireless network at home, there is one URL that I just cannot access with my browser: http://research.microsoft.com/ I have no problems with the Internet connection otherwise. But on that address I just get The connection was reset The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading. from Firefox. I am using a DSL modem (Westell) and Linksys wireless router (using DHCP). When I use my neighbor's wireless connection I can access the microsoft site without a problem. Additional technical details: But with my connection, here is what I get from nslookup. It is weird: It first cannot find the address, but after I look up another address it can find it: $ nslookup research.microsoft.com ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached $ nslookup google.com Non-authoritative answer: Name: google.com Address: 72.14.204.104 Name: google.com Address: 72.14.204.147 Name: google.com Address: 72.14.204.99 Name: google.com Address: 72.14.204.103 $ nslookup research.microsoft.com Non-authoritative answer: Name: research.microsoft.com Address: 131.107.65.14 But even after nslookup finds it Firefox still cannot access it. Here is what traceroute says: $ traceroute http://research.microsoft.com/ traceroute: Warning: http://research.microsoft.com/ has multiple addresses; using 8.15.7.117 traceroute to http://research.microsoft.com/ (8.15.7.117), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 dslrouter.westell.com (1XX.XXX.X.X) 4.515 ms 2.760 ms 3.072 ms 2 * * * Traceroute just to the IP: $ traceroute 131.107.65.14 traceroute to 131.107.65.14 (131.107.65.14), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 dslrouter.westell.com (1XX.XXX.X.X) 11.912 ms 2.684 ms 2.808 ms 2 * * * Comparison: Traceroute to google.com IP: $ traceroute 72.14.204.99 traceroute to 72.14.204.99 (72.14.204.99), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 dslrouter.westell.com (1XX.XXX.X.X) 6.428 ms 6.981 ms 117.099 ms 2 * * * Any comments / help?

  Read the article

• Active Directory FRS problems. 13508 error and other problems

  - by ITPIP

  I have 3 Domain Controllers. We will call them DC1, DC2 and DC3. DC3 and DC2 show Event ID 13508 in their FRS logs with no follow-up event(13509 I think) to say the error had been fixed. DC1's FRS log no matter what you do never shows any events besides FRS service stopped and started. DC1 holds the SYSVOL that needs to be replicated to the other DC's. The other DC's sysvol folders are empty. I have tried the burflag method of fixing this but I haven't had any luck. My procedure for that was to stop all FRS services on all DC's. Then set the burflag on DC1 to D4 and the other two DCs burflag to D2. Started FRS on DC1 and the only event's I see in DC1's FRS event logs are service stopped and service started messages. This fact is leading me to believe that something is wrong on FRS for DC1. I believe there should be events 13553 and 13516 in the FRS event logs after an authoritative sysvol restore. The other two DC's do not have anything in their SYSVOL, otherwise I would have made one of them the authoritative sysvol. DC1 is MS Server 2003 Enterprise Edition SP2 DC2 is MS Server 2003 Standard Edition SP1 DC3 is MS Server 2003 R2 Standard Edition SP2 I did not setup this domain originally but I am now the administrator of it, so I don't have a lot of background on why certain things may have been done in the past. My main goal is to try and fix these issues to get myself better prepared to decommision DC1 and add a DC running Server 2008 to my domain. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Using bind (named) as a public proxy server

  - by TrentDavis

  We have a Python DNS server that does a bunch of stuff to figure out values it should return for various DNS records. This works nicely, however as it is Python, the performance under high load won't be great. What I would like to do is have a "proxy" bind server sit in front of it to return results to the public internet. This will cache the results (typically 15 minutes, some records are a few seconds), so the load on the Python server will be greatly reduced as it will only see one look up per domain (only about 100 domains) every 15 minutes. The data in these domains changes a lot, so using a master won't work as it will constantly be changing. I have something setup that looked like it would work great (using a forwarder for the zone), and tested it with dig etc, all going great. However when we went to go live with it, things weren't working, and we figured out that named is not setting the "Authoritative" bit (fair enough, it is a forwarder). So my question is, can we tell bind to set the Authoritative bit for forwarded domains? I have looked at all the doco I can find, and can't find anything about doing things this way. Most of the doco about using it as a proxy if for a LAN to the internet. Ideally I would like to use bind as it is there and installed (CentOS 5 servers). But at a pinch we could look at a different name server to do the work if it just can't be done with bind. Thanks.

  Read the article

• How to set up multiple DNS servers on an intranet

  - by Brent

  We have an Active Directory network, with a mixture of Windows DNS, linux BIND servers, and want to use OpenDNS as our external DNS provider. I am wondering What is the best way to set up these servers (regarding forwarders, recursion, etc.)? Active Directory is our main internal DNS for our domain, and has 3 redundant servers. DHCP and all our servers use these as their DNS servers. Then we have a legacy AD server from an old network that is still authoritative for a bunch of domains. Finally, we have a couple of Linux Bind servers that are authoritative for a bunch of websites we host. Should our main AD servers point to our legacy AD server, which points to one of our BIND servers, which points to the other BIND server, which finally points out to openDNS? Or should our main AD servers point to all of these directly? - or is there a better option? What happens if a domain is listed in 2 places? Does DNS process the forwarders in order? What about root servers - if I want to use OpenDNS for "everything else", do I just list them as the last forwarders, and delete the root servers from all my DNS servers? How does recursion work - in this scenario, should I be using recursion or not?

  Read the article

• adding or routing additional domain email addresses

  - by Mustafa Ismail Mustafa

  We have exchange 2007 and we bought a new domain name and we're still keeping the old one so that we can wean everyone off of the old emails. Now, I'm wondering how to go about this. I need to add the new domain as accepted and authoritative by the exchange server. Emails on the new domain need to get routed to the inbox and ditto the old emails, however, I want to be able to change the reply-to in the header to the new email address automatically. I also want to set the new email addresses as the defaults. Ideally, I'd like to be able to add a message at the bottom of every externally outgoing email saying that the new email is [email protected]. But this is a nice to have, certainly not a must have. I've added the new domain as authoritative, and managed to change the primary smtp email addresses to the new one, but sent emails are not being routed to them and neither are the old email addresses! Now how the heck would I go about fixing all of that? I'm completely stumped! TIA

  Read the article

• DNS lookup fails when with all the MAC workstations

  - by user39564

  Hi, I am having this insane problem. We are mac-heavy users. Around 10 workstations, one Xserve server, two windows workstation and one Linux (me). Last year I added an A record to our domain's DNS. However we had to change that a few months ago to a new IP. But all the Mac workstations fail to resolve the proper DNS and they still resolve to the old IP, even after 2 months. On both the windows workstation and my linux box a simple nslookup resolves to proper IP. However, on ALL the mac workstation, dig and nslookup report the old IP address. From my linux workstation: jp@lo:~$ nslookup - 208.67.222.222 client.xyz.com Server: 208.67.222.222 Address: 208.67.222.222#53 Non-authoritative answer: Name: client.xyz.com Address: 68.71.40.xx But when I am trying the exact same command from any Mac workstation, I get the old IP: $ nslookup - 208.67.222.222 client.xyz.com Server: 208.67.222.222 Address: 208.67.222.222#53 Non-authoritative answer: Name: client.xyz.com Address: 98.143.155.xx The strange thing is that this only happens in our internal network. No problem from home nor from another server. I did try to flush the DNS, don't worry. It did not help. I am starting to wonder if my router (OpenWRT) or Mac OS X Server is not in some way spoofing the DNS request and thus acting as a cache. Any suggestions/comments would be grateful. Thank you, JP

  Read the article

• Active Directory FRS problems. 13508 error and other problems

  - by user59232

  I have 3 Domain Controllers. We will call them DC1, DC2 and DC3. DC3 and DC2 show Event ID 13508 in their FRS logs with no follow-up event(13509 I think) to say the error had been fixed. DC1's FRS log no matter what you do never shows any events besides FRS service stopped and started. DC1 holds the SYSVOL that needs to be replicated to the other DC's. The other DC's sysvol folders are empty. I have tried the burflag method of fixing this but I haven't had any luck. My procedure for that was to stop all FRS services on all DC's. Then set the burflag on DC1 to D4 and the other two DCs burflag to D2. Started FRS on DC1 and the only event's I see in DC1's FRS event logs are service stopped and service started messages. This fact is leading me to believe that something is wrong on FRS for DC1. I believe there should be events 13553 and 13516 in the FRS event logs after an authoritative sysvol restore. The other two DC's do not have anything in their SYSVOL, otherwise I would have made one of them the authoritative sysvol. DC1 is MS Server 2003 Enterprise Edition SP2 DC2 is MS Server 2003 Standard Edition SP1 DC3 is MS Server 2003 R2 Standard Edition SP2 I did not setup this domain originally but I am now the administrator of it, so I don't have a lot of background on why certain things may have been done in the past. My main goal is to try and fix these issues to get myself better prepared to decommision DC1 and add a DC running Server 2008 to my domain. Thanks.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  | Next Page >