BIND 9.4.3rc1 is now available.
The Doctor
doctor at doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
Tue Nov 11 12:42:59 UTC 2008
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 06:23:11PM -0800, JINMEI Tatuya / ?$B?@L at C#:H wrote:
> At Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:14:22 -0700,
> The Doctor <doctor at doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
>
> > > - Which operating system (and version) are you using?
> > > - Have you seen this in 9.4.2-P2 or 9.4.3b[1-3], too?
> > > - Does that change if you specify a small number for the
> > > reserved-sockets option in named.conf, e.g, like this?
> > > options {
> > > ....
> > > reserved-sockets 128;
> > > };
> >
> > Found it .
> >
> > At reserved-sockets 509 we are good. It chokes at 510.
>
> It seems we had the same conversation for 9.3.5-P2 in August. Mark
> replied at that time:
>
> > What's wierd here is that fcntl(F_DUPFD) succeeded but
> > fcntl(F_SETFL) then failed on the value returned from
> > fcntl(F_DUPFD).
>
> As you admitted, the OS (BSD/OS 4.3.1) is way too old and not yet
> supported any more (by the vendor), so I don't think it makes sense to
> chase this problem for that platform further. If you find a different
> problem with the above workaround, you'll probably want to change the
> OS...
>
A low reserved-sockets number does help.
It did help.
> ---
> JINMEI, Tatuya
> Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
--
Member - Liberal International
This is doctor at nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor at nl2k.ab.ca
God, Queen and country! Beware Anti-Christ rising!
Lest we forget 11/11/2008.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the bind-users
mailing list