Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 15:06:09 +0100 From: krad <kraduk@gmail.com> To: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> Cc: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, "stable@freebsd.org" <stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: unbound and ntp issuse Message-ID: <CALfReyf42UGq%2BCqdbYZUY27fHzc=BHwmz9v=%2BdYxUxGt1Xe1Xw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CALfReydTCRAj6=FUrWoRBF36DhyvcgGy1YT8km7f6q=T7WX9Bg@mail.gmail.com> References: <20160603191523.GE75630@zxy.spb.ru> <44y46ie92p.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> <20160606135018.GL75630@zxy.spb.ru> <CALfReye2A8XBcjSg%2BB0Z7_j4HJsF9h7EAEjAW4Li2F5c=846YA@mail.gmail.com> <20160607084733.GM75630@zxy.spb.ru> <CALfReyc1GtDnfvVaso5h_sKqP19GZftL7-5SmGqBWEjmOE7XpA@mail.gmail.com> <20160607104335.GN75630@zxy.spb.ru> <CALfReyfX=dNMbqJ%2BUNTUUqHHZEpMUMWpjoyiurKPRF3Ncn5%2BOA@mail.gmail.com> <CALfReydbzgrVYNRHvtzYufJhFg9xosDP6LEfb4u-Q271MDcvTg@mail.gmail.com> <1465306172.1188.24.camel@freebsd.org> <20160607133238.GO75630@zxy.spb.ru> <CALfReydTCRAj6=FUrWoRBF36DhyvcgGy1YT8km7f6q=T7WX9Bg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
running this at boot time may help as well unbound-control set_option val-permissive-mode: yes then after ntpd has started up run this unbound-control set_option val-permissive-mode: no Yes work around's, but work around's work by definition. On 7 June 2016 at 15:00, krad <kraduk@gmail.com> wrote: > it's a non solvable problem though as its a deadlock. You have to remove > one of the criteria in order to fix the issue automatically. > > On 7 June 2016 at 14:32, Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 07:29:32AM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote: >> >> > On Tue, 2016-06-07 at 12:10 +0100, krad wrote: >> > > whops that should be >> > > >> > > ntpdate_hosts not servers >> > > >> > >> > These suggestions are essentially insane because they're ignoring the >> > basic fact that the freebsd installer creates a non-working system. If >> > unbound requires DNSSEC, and DNSSEC requires good time, and good time >> > requires hostname resolution, then that circular dependency is a >> > problem that the freebsd project needs to fix, not something to be >> > hacked around by each individual sysadmin. >> >> Exactly! This is may point! >> >> > It is a bit disturbing to me that the project members who created this >> > situation have been silent in the face of *months* of reporting of it >> > by several different users. >> > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CALfReyf42UGq%2BCqdbYZUY27fHzc=BHwmz9v=%2BdYxUxGt1Xe1Xw>