Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 14:08:19 +0900 From: JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?= <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> To: Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BIND-8/9 interface bug? Or is it FreeBSD? Message-ID: <y7v65pbcbwc.wl@ocean.jinmei.org> In-Reply-To: <20030418234119.GA85777@parodius.com> References: <20030418201645.GA77986@parodius.com> <1050703016.604363.667.nullmailer@cicuta.babolo.ru> <20030418234119.GA85777@parodius.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> On Fri, 18 Apr 2003 16:41:19 -0700,
>>>>> Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> said:
> Under what circumstances would the primary request data from
> the secondary on it's _public_ IP? My query-source directive
> is set to the public IP, and this IP should (according to BIND
> documentation) be used by both TCP and UDP queries (port #,
> however, cannot be guaranteed).
You seemed to misunderstand the comment. It said "the problematic
situation can happen when ***the secondary sends a query from its
public address to the primary's private address***":
query
secondary:----------------->primary
64.71.184.190 10.0.0.1
(rejected)<----
response
So I guess you should look at the configuration in secondary, not
primary.
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?y7v65pbcbwc.wl>