I'm running bind in a chroot environment. It seems that since the Redhat snafu which wrecked bind (yes, I had caching nameserver running as well but not anymore) I have been having problem with my slave nameservers retrieving updates from the master. Looking at the zone records, some are owned by root, some are owned by named. I'm now confused as to what the ownership should be and what permissions should be assigned. Could someone shed some light on this? Thanks, John Hinton
Hi John. Normally in the redhat setup the named process runs as the named user. This can be seen by running `ps -aux | egrep '[n]amed'` named 1661 0.0 0.2 40108 4836 ? S Jan31 0:25 /usr/sbin/named -u named -t /jail/named As you can see from the first column the user is named. Also the -u flag indicates the same. So if any of your slave zone files are owned by root they won't be writable by named. I recommend you chown those zone files to be owned by named user. -----Original Message----- From: centos-bounces at caosity.org [mailto:centos-bounces at caosity.org] On Behalf Of John Hinton Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 8:43 AM To: CentOS at caosity.org Subject: [Centos] Bind Issues I'm running bind in a chroot environment. It seems that since the Redhat snafu which wrecked bind (yes, I had caching nameserver running as well but not anymore) I have been having problem with my slave nameservers retrieving updates from the master. Looking at the zone records, some are owned by root, some are owned by named. I'm now confused as to what the ownership should be and what permissions should be assigned. Could someone shed some light on this? Thanks, John Hinton _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS at caosity.org http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Has anyone attempted this on Centos recently? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Hinton" <webmaster at ew3d.com> To: <CentOS at caosity.org> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 11:43 AM Subject: [Centos] Bind Issues> I'm running bind in a chroot environment. It seems that since the Redhat > snafu which wrecked bind (yes, I had caching nameserver running as well > but not anymore) I have been having problem with my slave nameservers > retrieving updates from the master. > > Looking at the zone records, some are owned by root, some are owned by > named. I'm now confused as to what the ownership should be and what > permissions should be assigned. Could someone shed some light on this? > > Thanks, > John Hinton > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at caosity.org > http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > >
On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 11:43 -0500, John Hinton wrote:> I'm running bind in a chroot environment. It seems that since the Redhat > snafu which wrecked bind (yes, I had caching nameserver running as well > but not anymore) I have been having problem with my slave nameservers > retrieving updates from the master. > > Looking at the zone records, some are owned by root, some are owned by > named. I'm now confused as to what the ownership should be and what > permissions should be assigned. Could someone shed some light on this? > > Thanks, > John HintonWhat user are you running named as? What user is generating the zone files? Ted