BIND slave stops updating from master after 1-3 days

Brandon Whaley brandonw at
Tue Jul 30 20:38:01 UTC 2013

Hey Steve, thanks for the reply.  Here's the top of one of the masters'
named.conf files (they're all the same, with the exception of which zones
are on them:

controls {
        inet allow { localhost; } keys { "rndc-key"; };

include "/etc/rndc.key";

  channel simple_log {
    file "/var/log/ramlog/named.log" versions 3 size 65m;
    severity debug 0;
    print-time yes;
    print-severity yes;
    print-category yes;
  category default{

zone "." {
        type hint;
        file "/var/named/";

options {
        statistics-file "/var/named/data/named_stats.txt";
        directory "/var/named";
        recursion no;
        transfers-out 10000;
        notify explicit;
        also-notify {;; };
        allow-transfer {;; };
        files 4096;

zone "" {
        type master;
        file "/var/named/named.local";

zone "" {
        type master;
        file "/var/named/";

I think that's what you asked for.  In case I misunderstood, here's a zone
entry from the slave's named.conf (this immediately follows the options
block in my first email:

zone "" {
        type slave;
        file "/var/named/slaves/";
        masters {;;;;; };

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Steven Carr <sjcarr at> wrote:

> On 30 July 2013 20:31, Brandon Whaley <brandonw at>wrote:
>> Sorry for the bump here, but through extensive troubleshooting I've
>> identified a trend in this.  It appears that zones hosted on the
>> lower-numbered masters are still updating without issue.  This leads me to
>> believe that something is causing BIND to "forget" the later cluster
>> servers, as the logs show that it doesn't even try to query them for zone
>> updates.  Is this known behavior?  Perhaps a network failure causes a
>> master to be marked "bad" in newer versions of BIND?  Restarting named on
>> the slave continues to correct the problem, so for now I'm (unfortunately)
>> restarting named frequently on this slave.
> Can you post a snippet of one of your secondary zone config stanzas so we
> can see how you have the slave zone configured.
> From previous posts to the list I think it was identified that BIND will
> contact the first master server listed and failover to the second master if
> the first wasn't contactable, but then it would ignore any additional
> masters.
> Would be good to get some clarification on this from ISC, I've tried to
> trace my way through the source code and can't identify where BIND decides
> which master to update from, all I can find is the code where it goes to
> cleanup if the server isn't contactable (bind-9.9.3-P2/lib/dns/zone.c
> ln:13647), but can't see where it would then choose another one and try
> again.
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> Please visit to
> unsubscribe from this list
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at

Best Regards,
Brandon W.
Tier 3 System Administrator
InMotion Hosting Inc.

757-416-6575 (Int'l)
NEW: 24x7 EMAIL and PHONE Technical Support

Did you know?
We'll Build, Update and Promote Your Site for You! Visit
Answers to commonly asked questions, as well as other useful tools, can be
found at

How am I doing? Please feel free to email my manager at
manager_feedback at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the bind-users mailing list