Bind 9.2.4, views, and different class Bs

carcarx at carcarx at
Thu Nov 2 13:56:17 UTC 2006

Hi, Kevin,

Your earlier post was what I needed. After discovering the proper
syntax for an "include" file in named.conf
I was able to do what I needed.

I can see, for the purpose for which we need this, that any other
similar requests with disparate
network topologies for views, will result in a linear programming to
obtain the match-list nightmare.

Thanks, again!

On Nov 1, 12:08 pm, Kevin Darcy <k... at> wrote:

> I think the important part you're missing too, is that there is no "fall
> through" for views.

More information about the bind-users mailing list