Bind named to 0.0.0.0 (INADDR_ANY)

[Richard Wall]

2008/10/1 Adam Tkac <atkac at redhat.com>:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 11:28:25AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
>>
>> In message <cbf1a1340809301028o3ffc5e71ua6a38d7aaefeedca at mail.gmail.com>, "Rich
>> ard Wall" writes:
>> > 2008/9/30 Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews at isc.org>:
>> > > In message <cbf1a1340809300721j468531d5sa5da8bedb3fff47e at mail.gmail.com>, "
>> > Rich
>> > > ard Wall" writes:

<snip>

>> > Out of interest, how do other services get round this? For example I
>> > notice that ntpd is listening on IPv4 0.0.0.0:123; doesn't it have the
>> > same issue?
>>
>>       Yes and the same solution was used. :-)
>
> Well it is quite different if you create per-interface bindings or bind(2)
> to INADDR_ANY.
>
> If you create per-interface bindings and you create new network interface
> BIND can't see it and use it (not sure if rndc reload/reconfig helps,
> I haven't test it yet).

Mark, Adam, Danny,

Thanks very much for your answers.
So it sounds like ntpd will in time adopt the same behaviour as bind.
That makes sense and I suppose it's better to be explicit about the
interfaces that you listen on and send to. I'll work around it.

-RichardW.
-- 
Richard Wall
Support Engineer
ApplianSys Ltd
http://www.appliansys.com

(t) +44 (0)24 7643 0094
(f) +44 (0)87 0762 7063
(e) richard.wall at appliansys.com