Q of Forwarders Statement
Hideaki NISHIMURA
nishimura at mxb.nes.nec.co.jp
Tue Oct 11 12:11:10 UTC 2005
Thanks to your follow up, Kevin. :-)
I understood I could also use forward/forwarders statement
for a stub zone.
Finally, I understood I could use it for any type zones
except a hint zone and a delegation-only zone.
I gave the bind-9.3.1 source code a once-over. However,
there is not cofidence whether what I confirmed is right.
Best regards.
#And I'm sorry in clumsy English.
| Hideaki NISHIMURA wrote:
|
| >Thanks, Kevin. :-)
| >
| >I understand the ARM's syntax miss of forwawrders statement
| >(we can use empty list).
| >
| >And your notice about behavior of forwarding in master zone
| >is very useful.
| >
| >There is subzones (ex. qux.foo.bar.co.jp) in the lower part
| >of foo.bar.co.jp zone. So that, I think it is right to use
| >forwarders statement with empty list in master zone.
| >
| >And now, I was able to know forwarders statement could use
| >not only in master zone (or slave zone) but also in forward
| >zone.
| >
| You can use it for a stub zone too.
|
| - Kevin
|
| >
| >Best regards.
| >
| >
| > | Hideaki NISHIMURA wrote:
| > |
| > | >Hello, bind-users.
| > | >
| > | >I have two questions about forwarder function (bind-9.3.1).
| > | >
| > | >first, I set up the forwarders zone as follows (summary).
| > | >
| > | > --------------------------------------------------------
| > | > options {
| > | > ...
| > | > forward only;
| > | > forwarders { 192.168.5.1; 172.16.5.1; };
| > | > ...
| > | > };
| > | >
| > | > zone "foo.bar.co.jp" {
| > | > type master;
| > | > file "db.foo.bar.co.jp";
| > | > forward only;
| > | > forwarders {};
| > | > };
| > | > --------------------------------------------------------
| > | >
| > | > Generally, "forward" and "forwarders" statement use with
| > | > "forward" zone type.
| > | >
| > | > But, I want to set up "no forward" in foo.bar.co.jp zone.
| > | > So that, I am setting up these statement with "master"
| > | > zone type.
| > | >
| > | > Is this configuration is correct ?
| > | >
| > | >Second, I read the explanation of zone statement.
| > | >(Bind 9 ARM distributed with bind-9.3.1).
| > | >
| > | > In "6.2.23 zone Statement Grammar" section:
| > | >
| > | > --------------------------------------------------------
| > | > Zone zone_name [class] [{
| > | > ...
| > | > [ forward (only|first) ; ]
| > | > [ forwarders { ip_addr [port ip_port] ; [ ip_addr [port ip_port] ; ... ] }; ]
| > | > ...
| > | > }];
| > | > --------------------------------------------------------
| > | >
| > | > This description means forwarders statement needs a
| > | > least one option ("forwarders { X.X.X.X; };").
| > | >
| > | > But, in "6.2.24.1 Zone Types" section, "forward" paragraph:
| > | >
| > | > --------------------------------------------------------
| > | > If no forwarders statement is present
| > | > or an empty list for forwarders is given, ...
| > | > --------------------------------------------------------
| > | >
| > | > This description means it arrows "forwarders {};".
| > | >
| > | > Which is correct ? (arrows least one or empty)
| > | >
| > | >Best regards.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | The ARM syntax is wrong. An empty forwarders statement is valid.
| > |
| > | Note, however, that an empty forwarders won't prevent forwarding for the
| > | foo.bar.co.jp zone, since there is no forwarding for that zone anyway --
| > | you're serving it as a master zone, so all of the responses will come
| > | from your own authoritative data. The only effect of the empty
| > | forwarders is to disable forwarding for *subzones* of foo.bar.co.jp. If
| > | you have no subzones of that zone, then there is no need for the empty
| > | forwarders.
| > |
| > | - Kevin
| >
| >--------
| >Hideaki NISHIMURA (^_^)
--------
Hideaki NISHIMURA (^_^)
More information about the bind-users
mailing list