From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Aug 21 14:05:01 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) id OAA11509 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:05:01 -0700 Received: from hemi.com (hemi.com [204.132.158.10]) by freefall.FreeBSD.org (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id OAA11502 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 1995 14:04:58 -0700 Received: (from mbarkah@localhost) by hemi.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id PAA07633; Mon, 21 Aug 1995 15:07:49 -0600 From: Ade Barkah Message-Id: <199508212107.PAA07633@hemi.com> Subject: Re: rlogin on illegal port To: gary@palmer.demon.co.uk (Gary Palmer) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 15:07:49 -0600 (MDT) Cc: jdl@chromatic.com, hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <5022.809038356@palmer.demon.co.uk> from "Gary Palmer" at Aug 21, 95 09:52:36 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1041 Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > Jon Loeliger writes: > > > Aug 14 18:57:52 chrome named[65]: Lame delegation to 'hemi.com' > > from [128.x.x.x] (server for 'hemi.com'?) on query on name 'hemi.com' > > >I haven't got a clue in the world what this means. To be fair, I > >could easily have a *bad* DNS configuration here. I'm working on that. > > OK. This is one I can answer. It means that the server said it gave a > non-authorative answer, but it lists itself as being able to give an > authorative answer. Yes, looking at it, it appears that there is a configuration error in one of our secondary name servers. That is, we have "foo.bar.org" as a legal secondary server, but a clone machine there called "foo1" tried to answer and confused itself. I'll work with the DNS people there to get this fixed, thanks for the help. Regards, -Ade Barkah -------------------------------------------------------------------- Inet: mbarkah@hemi.com - HEMISPHERE ONLINE - www: --------------------------------------------------------------------