Em Mon, 08 Oct 2001 18:39:05 -0400 Kevin Darcy Escreveu:

> 
> Rainaldo Augusto Silva wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> >   I´m in doubt about some issues related to ´hint zone´... Please, 
let
> > me know additional informations:
> >
> >	1) What are accepted options in ´hint zone´ (BIND8.2.3)? I have
> > seen (in docs.) only ´check-names´ option is accepted... Is it true?
> 
> As far as I know, yes. I can't think of anything else that would make
> sense there.

Believe it! It make sense for us... ;-))


> 
> >	2) If yes/true (above), why others options are not accepted in 
hint
> > zone (like: forwarders, allow-query, etc...)? I would like inhibit 
the
> > BIND lookup for new root-servers when it is started...
> 
> No, you are misunderstanding what a hints zone is. It's just a way for
> the nameserver to find the root servers. It's not "zone data", just
> "hints", so it makes no sense to put an "allow-query" or
> "forwarders" option on it. Once the real root data is obtained, the 
hints
> data are essentially discarded.
> 
> Why would you want to restrict query access to the root zone anyway?
> I can't think of any legitimate reason to do that.

I do not want to restrict any queries access... That was only 
statements example! :-)
What´s happening: If I have a "forwarder { 172....;};" statement in 
global options (named.conf), when I have started BIND, it has ignored 
my internal root server (assigned from db.cache) and it has asked by 
´NS for zone "."´ to the forwarders (assigned from global options, 
172...) instead of my (REAL) internal root-servers (assigned in 
db.cache).
Why it has ignored root-server assigned in db.cache when I 
put "forwarders" statment in global options?
If want you can see that running tcpdump...
When I took off "forwarders {172...;);" it works fine (asking for 
NS "." to internal root-server), but did not forwarding. 
Can you explain this engine for us?


> 
> And what do you hope to achieve by putting "forwarders" at the root 
zone,
> that cannot be achieved by specifying "forwarders" in the
> "options" statement?
> 
> >	3) Are there some method to inhibit BIND don´t ask (lookup) for
> > others root-servers assigned in db.root? I mean, we have four 
internal
> > root-server assigned in ´my´ db.cache, and when I start BIND (named)
> > they are ignored (overwrited)... I believe that happens because 
there
> > are a ´forwarders { bla; bla...; };´ statement in named.conf ´global
> > options´. This (BIND) behavior is true/correct? Why? (detail: I must
> > have the ´forwarders´ statement in global options, because my 
clients
> > need to be resolving internet names AND intranet names).
> >
> >   I have already heard sounds like (DNS & BIND Book): ´It will not
> > work, because intranet names resolutions are not compatible with
> > internet name resolutions´. But I didn´t believe this... :-)
> 
> Believe it. There is only *one* root zone, as far as any given 
nameserver
> is concerned. Either it sees the internal root zone (through the hints
> file) or it sees the external one (through the forwarders). There is 
no
> way -- and no reason -- for it to see *both*. If you want to resolve 
both
> internal and external names from the same nameserver, then you need to
> define all of your internal domains on the nameserver. Note that you
> don't have to define all of the internal *zones* on the nameserver -- 
you
> can just define the apex of every internal domain and 
specify "forwarders
> { }" in the zone definition in order to inhibit forwarding for
> subdomains/subzones.

I had used already this method (w/ forwarding to highest internal 
domain), but I would like to do that from another way.

[ ],

Rainaldo.

-------------------------------------


MailBR - O e-mail do Brasil -- http://www.mailbr.com.br
Faça já o seu. É gratuito!!!