No subject


Tue Apr 2 00:56:56 UTC 2013


w/o a problem, and they have several customers that have elected to do so.
Unfortunately, I haven't had the cycles to test this, but the person I got
this from I've known and worked with for years, and has done it.  Also,
from what I've seen of how it works, there's no reason it wouldn't work.
(see below)


>How is it that QIP 5.x works? It is my understanding that many of these
>products translate the database- or LDAP-stored data to records BIND can
>understand through a proprietary 'nameserver' and in that way dynamically
>updates the BIND nameserver(s). Here is where vendor software such as QIP
>can potentially break for future versions of BIND and omit newly
>integrated record types. 

If you tell QIP your server is a "bind 8.1" server, it basically does the
following:

  - ships zone files and named.conf to the server via qip-rmtd
      - files are put wherever you defined "directory" for that server in
        QIP.  Either compile bind to look there for it's conf file, run it
        with -c, or symlink to it.
  - sends a sighup to the named process (found via /etc/named.pid.  Again,
    make sure it's where qip-rmtd expects it)

Now, if you wanna talk about how it does things in relation to RFC2136,
that's an entirely different story that I don't have the energy to go into.
Suffice it to say that they're handling of dynamic updates is not RFC
compliant in some ways, but it _will_ interract with a stock bind server.
[NOTE: Quadritek's DNS server _is_ based on stock bind source, BTW.]


>How quickly does Lucent respond to changes in BIND with patchs, assuming
>the above style of operation? This is more a question for Lucent, but if
>any of you have experience with them, I would like to hear about it.

Not fast enough, IMHO.  They're still using 8.1.2 with QIP 5.1, but like I
said, you can always use your own. :)


On Thu, 6 Apr 2000, Jeff Robinson wrote: >
Jim,
> > > QIP 5.x uses RFC 2136 compliant DDNS to update its DNS servers from
> DHCP servers.

depending on how you configure QIP, this _may_ be true, but IMHO, it's a
REALLY bad idea.  There is NO name checking done by the DHCP server
(conflicts, anything).


--John


--
    ______John F. Steele___________________________________________
   (___________________________________steele at dfw.nostrum.com______)

Jacquin's Postulate on Democratic Government:
  No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while
the legislature is in session.



More information about the bind-users mailing list