We've got several CentOS 3.x systems running DNS that we keep updated automatically via YUM. Recently two of those systems (not all of them) when updating themselves to the latest versions of BIND, automatically replaced /etc/named.conf with a new one and saved the old one as /etc/named.conf.rpmsave. Which of course broke DNS for those servers. All servers got updated, but only two of them did the rewrite. Any ideas as to why it might have happed, or how to make sure it doesn't happen again? Hopefully nothing so simplistic as "exclude bind from auto updates" though if that's the only answer, we'll take it. Thanks. Jeff -- Jeff Lasman, Nobaloney Internet Services 1254 So Waterman Ave., Suite 50, San Bernardino, CA 92408 Our blists address used on lists is for list email only Phone +1 909 266-9209, or see: "http://www.nobaloney.net/contactus.html"
remove pkg caching-nameserver then restore named.conf.rpmsave, restart bind Jeff Lasman wrote:> We've got several CentOS 3.x systems running DNS that we keep updated > automatically via YUM. > > Recently two of those systems (not all of them) when updating themselves > to the latest versions of BIND, automatically replaced /etc/named.conf > with a new one and saved the old one as /etc/named.conf.rpmsave. > > Which of course broke DNS for those servers. > > All servers got updated, but only two of them did the rewrite. > > Any ideas as to why it might have happed, or how to make sure it doesn't > happen again? > > Hopefully nothing so simplistic as "exclude bind from auto updates" > though if that's the only answer, we'll take it. > > Thanks. > > Jeff
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 19:31 -0700, Jeff Lasman wrote:> We've got several CentOS 3.x systems running DNS that we keep updated > automatically via YUM. > > Recently two of those systems (not all of them) when updating themselves > to the latest versions of BIND, automatically replaced /etc/named.conf > with a new one and saved the old one as /etc/named.conf.rpmsave. > > Which of course broke DNS for those servers. > > All servers got updated, but only two of them did the rewrite. > > Any ideas as to why it might have happed, or how to make sure it doesn't > happen again? > > Hopefully nothing so simplistic as "exclude bind from auto updates" > though if that's the only answer, we'll take it. > > Thanks. > > JeffIt is probably not bind that is causing your issues, but caching- nameserver. RH says you should not have caching-nameserver installed on a machine that is also doing domain control. So save your named.conf also maybe the hints file (usually /var/named/named.ca) ... then remove caching-nameserver ... then restore your config files and you should not have this issue in the future. See these links: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=145244 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=145094 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050622/6dd58368/attachment-0003.sig>
probably because they have caching-nameserver installed. On Wed, 22 Jun 2005, Jeff Lasman wrote:> We've got several CentOS 3.x systems running DNS that we keep updated > automatically via YUM. > > Recently two of those systems (not all of them) when updating themselves > to the latest versions of BIND, automatically replaced /etc/named.conf > with a new one and saved the old one as /etc/named.conf.rpmsave. > > Which of course broke DNS for those servers. > > All servers got updated, but only two of them did the rewrite. > > Any ideas as to why it might have happed, or how to make sure it doesn't > happen again? > > Hopefully nothing so simplistic as "exclude bind from auto updates" > though if that's the only answer, we'll take it. > > Thanks. > > Jeff >