localhost name lookup
Greg Choules
greg at isc.org
Fri Jan 24 23:01:48 UTC 2025
> On 24 Jan 2025, at 21:32, Lee <ler762 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 3:27 PM Greg Choules wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 24 Jan 2025, at 19:07, Lee <ler762 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 4:55 AM Petr Špaček wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 15. 01. 25 19:55, Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 11:55 AM Ondřej Surý wrote:
>>>>>> On 14. 1. 2025, at 16:56, Lee <ler762 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In other words, should I submit a bug report to the Debian bind
>>>>>> maintainers or ISC?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With both my ISC and Debian hats on, I am going to be very frank
>>>>>> and say this has a very low priority, so unless you actually want to
>>>>>> work on this and submit a solid correct patch with a good reasoning,
>>>>>> there's probably nobody that is going to work on this.
>>>>>
>>>>> I appreciate the honesty, but I think I'm missing something?
>>>>>
>>>>> The good reasoning part would be quoting the RFC and the solid correct
>>>>> patch would be stripping out everything except the two line change I
>>>>> made to my db.local in the original post.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately not quite, BIND does not ship with any zone files.
>>>
>>> Really?! I installed BIND on windows however long ago when it was
>>> supported on Windows and it came with a db.local that looked identical
>>> to the one that came with Debian.
>>
>> Certainly for the last quite a lot of years there hasn't been a hint zone file - whatever it might be called - shipped with BIND, if ever: there are too many releases to search through.
>> The current (at the time of release) set of root servers are contained in the file rootns.c, but this is definitely not a zone file, just the place BIND gets its built-in hints from.
>> I would think that, if a file called db.local, db.hint, db.root or whatever does exist, it is someone else who created it.
>
> I don't know who created or included db.local in the distribution of
> bind. What I do know is that my installation of bind on windows and
> my installation of bind on debian came with a db.local -- here's the
> one that came with my installation of bind on Windows:
>
I just looked in the source for 9.0.0, released nearly 25 years ago, to see what was there because I was curious. There is no file called “db.local": here’s the link if you want to check for yourself: https://downloads.isc.org/isc/bind9/9.0.0/ Every release since then is also available to download, should you want to check them all.
So the fact that you *do* have a file called “db.local", I think means nothing. Anyone could have created that for some purpose only they knew at the time.
> C:\MyProgs\BIND\etc>more db.local
> ;
> ; BIND data file for local loopback interface
> ;
> $TTL 604800
> @ IN SOA localhost. root.localhost. (
> 2 ; Serial
> 604800 ; Refresh
> 86400 ; Retry
> 2419200 ; Expire
> 604800 ) ; Negative Cache TTL
> ;
> @ IN NS localhost.
> @ IN A 127.0.0.1
> @ IN AAAA ::1
>
> C:\MyProgs\BIND\etc>
>
> and here's my modified copy of db.local on my Debian machine (I added
> the two wildcard lines for .localhost.)
>
> lee at spot /etc/bind
> $ cat db.local
> ;
> ; BIND data file for local loopback interface
> ;
> $TTL 604800
> @ IN SOA localhost. root.localhost. (
> 3 ; Serial
> 604800 ; Refresh
> 86400 ; Retry
> 2419200 ; Expire
> 604800 ) ; Negative Cache TTL
> ;
> @ IN NS localhost.
> @ IN A 127.0.0.1
> @ IN AAAA ::1
>
> * IN A 127.0.0.1
> IN AAAA ::1
>
>
> lee at spot /etc/bind
> $ dig +short foo.bar.localhost aaaa
> ::1
>
> lee at spot /etc/bind
> $ grep db.local *
> named.conf.default-zones: file "/etc/bind/db.local";
>
> lee at spot /etc/bind
> $
>
>
> Regards,
> Lee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20250124/8da1e1b9/attachment.htm>
More information about the bind-users
mailing list