Re: bind 9.4.1: bug or feature?

7 msg	not resolving from some places?

bind 9.4.1: bug or feature?
\ Tom Schmitt (24 Jul 2007)
. \ Adam Tkac (24 Jul 2007)
. . \ Tom Schmitt (24 Jul 2007)
. \ Chris Buxton (24 Jul 2007)
. \ Mark Andrews (24 Jul 2007)
. . \ Tom Schmitt (24 Jul 2007)

1 msg	Question about release numbering policy
4 msg	Building Bind in Windows
3 msg	Error When installing Debug version of BIND
1 msg	One last word about 'License'
5 msg	Web front-end for client control
14 msg	Info: Algorithm behind the intelligent selectio...
2 msg	Bind and Windows2003 AD and DHCP
2 msg	Bind+DLZ writing huge number of logs to /var/lo...
9 msg	BIND covered under which license and does it co...
5 msg	Basic bind capacity question
4 msg	Debian Bind 9.4.1 crash
4 msg	Installing BIND on 64 bit Win2k3 Server
1 msg	Joachim Strohbach/DENIC ist bis 23. Juli 2007 a...
3 msg	named process dying on rndc reconfig
13 msg	TTL record changes in All domains
4 msg	Use nameserver name or IP?
4 msg	DLZ and SRV records: Priority and weight not wo...
3 msg	Anyone has experience with DLZ drivers?

Subject:	Re: bind 9.4.1: bug or feature?
Group:	Bind-users
From:	Tom Schmitt
Date:	24 Jul 2007

>
> It's also how the DNS was designed to be used.
>
> Forward zones should be the exception not the rule.
>
> Mark

It's not about making forwarding the rule. But there are cases (like here when I have to delegate through a firewall and have only a point-to-point connection between the two DNS-servers which is allowed by the firewall) when you need a forwarding.

And for these cases I think it would be worth to consider, if it would be possible that the named writes a warning-logmessage when it is reading its configuration, that there is a forwarding zone which is never to be used (because of the missing NS-record).

Tom.
--
Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört?
Der kanns mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger