From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 9 17:40:00 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F074416A420 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2006 17:40:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-hackers@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 753E043D45 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2006 17:39:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from freebsd-hackers@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1FHP5o-00052X-AC for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2006 18:38:28 +0100 Received: from gw205.f5.com ([205.229.151.151]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 09 Mar 2006 18:38:28 +0100 Received: from atkin901 by gw205.f5.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 09 Mar 2006 18:38:28 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org From: othermark Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 09:36:42 -0800 Lines: 13 Message-ID: References: <20060309164329.GD24511@dan.emsphone.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: gw205.f5.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.1 Sender: news Subject: Re: Advice on the lightweight resolver, lwres. X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 17:40:01 -0000 Dan Nelson wrote: > According to the lwres manpage, lwresd needs to be running, and I'm > guessing it would listen on UDP port 921. Ahh, many thanks, embarrassingly enough, this is the problem. It pays to look at more than just the function manpage if available... I had, of course, mistakenly assumed that the lightweight resolver still connected to named, but was 'lightweight'. -- othermark atkin901 at nospam dot yahoo dot com (!wired)?(coffee++):(wired);