Single slave zone definition for two view (cache file name problem)

Matus UHLAR - fantomas uhlar at
Wed Mar 18 08:56:25 UTC 2015

On 18.03.15 11:48, Constantin Stefanov wrote:
>But in fact the configuration with only one writable file referenced
>several times is suported now. If I write:
>view "view1" {
>	zone "" {
>		masters {IP;};
>		file "slave/";
>	};
>view "view2" {
>	zone "" {
>		in-view "view1";
>	};
>then both views will refernce ther same writable file, won't they? Or am
>I missing something about "in-view" directive?
>And if I'm right, the only question is how to simplify the configuration
>so not to have two definitions in two files for every slave zone which
>is shared between views.

maybe you could put all those zone definitions into one file and include it
in each view.

the only other way is stop using views...
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar at ;
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
On the other hand, you have different fingers. 

More information about the bind-users mailing list