similar to: Physically moving a mail server vs. cached DNS

> > In your experience, what's the "longest" a DNS cache is configured to > keep outdated information? A day? A week? A month? Longer? > That is controlled by the TTL (time to live) entry. A DNS server must refresh it's cache within the TTL for the entry. Using the '-a' option to host will give you more information: $ host -a microlinux.fr Trying

------------ Original Message ------------ > Date: Saturday, July 01, 2017 10:57:42 +0100 > From: Pete Biggs <pete at biggs.org.uk> > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Physically moving a mail server vs. cached DNS > > On Sat, 2017-07-01 at 11:37 +0200, Nicolas Kovacs wrote: >> Le 01/07/2017 ? 11:00, Pete Biggs a ?crit : >> > That is controlled by the TTL (time to live)

Le 23/05/2018 ? 16:36, Nux! a ?crit?: > Try "iptables -I INPUT" for your FTP rule. Doesn't work. I redirected all my errors to /var/log/messages, so here's what I get when I try to connect Filezilla to that server. May 23 16:48:58 c7-server kernel: +++ IPv4 packet rejected +++ IN=enp0s3 OUT= MAC=08:00:27:00:00:03:d4:85:64:b2:b2:1b:08:00 SRC=192.168.2.2 DST=192.168.2.12

Le 01/07/2017 ? 11:00, Pete Biggs a ?crit : > That is controlled by the TTL (time to live) entry. A DNS server must > refresh it's cache within the TTL for the entry. Using the '-a' option > to host will give you more information: So I would have to use the -a option with the old DNS server, to know their TTL. I'm also wondering if some DNS server don't override the

Le 11/04/2017 ? 18:11, Jonathan Billings a ?crit : > Maybe we should just jump right to the end that we always have each > time this comes up. systemd is the death of linux and you're leaving > for FreeBSD/devuan/whatever. Lets just move along now. I've been using CentOS 5.x almost exclusively for a few years on both servers and desktops, and then I went back to Slackware Linux

Hi, I have a series of websites hosted on two CentOS 7 servers, using Apache virtual hosts. One of these servers is a "sandbox" machine, to test things and to fiddle around. On the sandbox server, I have a few dummy websites I'm hosting. # ls /var/www/html/ default phpinfo slackbox-mail slackbox-site unixbox-mail unixbox-site Since Apache is running as system user

Hi, I set up a webserver with Apache on one of the machines on the local network. There's a DNS configured for the LAN, with a dummy domain name (presbytere.local), and every machine is pingable by its hostname. The webserver runs on the machine 'buildbox'. The webserver actually has two (static) websites on it, for testing and fiddling purposes. Each site's pages are stored

Hi, I'm currently setting up a local FTP server, to receive disk images sent with G4L (Ghost4Linux). This server has been running Slackware Linux before, and the Vsftpd setup was relatively simple. With CentOS things seem to be slightly different, so I'm currently trying to work things out. For the moment, two things seem to be creating problems, the simple iptables firewall and

Mathias, thank you very much for your comprehensive instructions! Just one question: Harry suggested that, in order to overcome the below DNS related problems, the TTL would have to be adjusted (lowered). However, the TTL seems to be the only time value not covered by the command provided by you. Is it really the TTL that is the culprit or is it rather the first time value (something like

On 13/02/2020 13:11, Paul Littlefield wrote: > On 12/02/2020 13:08, Rowland penny via samba wrote: >> The first is that a DC must use itself as its nameserver and if >> something goes wrong e.g. Samba has fallen over, then there isn't >> much point having another nameserver, Samba isn't going to use it >> >> The second is, it will not hurt having a second

Hi Ole, I'm still not answering your issue but I come back to speak about TTL. Perhaps someone would be able to bring us some light on that. This morning I'm trying to reproduce the way I do broke my test AD domain. This leads me to deal with SOA record (I broke my test AD seizing FSMO roles before removing old FSMO owner, SOA was not changed during that process and I suspect this was

Thank You Rowland. I did it like You say, killed avahi, added the record without domain suffix, but nothing changed, and the record seems no different compared to other records added with the suffix some time before. My Samba DNS record looks like this (and I see nothing special in there):   Name=, Records=3, Children=0     SOA: serial=39, refresh=900, retry=600, expire=86400, minttl=3600,

On 11/20/2015 10:17 AM, mathias dufresne wrote: > > > 2015-11-20 15:11 GMT+01:00 James <lingpanda101 at gmail.com > <mailto:lingpanda101 at gmail.com>>: > > On 11/20/2015 7:40 AM, Ole Traupe wrote: > > > > Am 20.11.2015 um 11:54 schrieb mathias dufresne: > > Hi Ole, > > I'm still not answering your issue

Although I don't know what "dig" actually means, I was able to dig up the following for my SOA: my.domain.tld. 3600 IN SOA DC2.my.domain.tld. hostmaster.my.domain.tld. 29 180 600 86400 180 This is after I reduced refresh interval and minimum TTL to 3 min (180 s). Still, the TTL of the SOA itself is 1h (3600 s). This strongly suggests, that the TTL for DNS info

On 11/20/2015 7:40 AM, Ole Traupe wrote: > > > Am 20.11.2015 um 11:54 schrieb mathias dufresne: >> Hi Ole, >> >> I'm still not answering your issue but I come back to speak about >> TTL. Perhaps someone would be able to bring us some light on that. >> >> This morning I'm trying to reproduce the way I do broke my test AD >> domain. This

Ok, I see. Nevertheless, thank you very much for your effort! I must say that I can't actually believe that no one knows an answer to this problem. It must affect MANY people using Samba DCs. According to all the tests on the wiki, everything is working fine. Then I pull the plug on my first DC and no one can log on. And this time I waited far longer than the suggested "refresh

Hi all, I am experiencing strange behaviour regarding DNS resolution with my samba-driven AD. This is with Debian-packaged samba on raspberry Pi: # samba -V Version 4.19.5-Debian # uname -a Linux dc3.ad.mydomain.tld 6.1.0-rpi8-rpi-v8 #1 SMP PREEMPT Debian 1:6.1.73-1+rpt1 (2024-01-25) aarch64 GNU/Linux I would expect that every DNS server of the domain would respond with the same SOA record. But

> It is DNS related. > >> What is the best way of dealing with this? > The *best way* is a HA solution for your DNS Servers, but its expensive. > > The DNS client (resolver) caches the srv records for 15 minutes aka 900 > seconds. > > ipconfig /flushdns drops the cache. Reboot does the same. > > On server side you may set shorter TTL for the server records, but

Le 27/05/2019 à 09:50, Rowland penny via samba a écrit : > On 27/05/2019 08:28, Julien TEHERY via samba wrote: >> Hi >> >> I have a setup with 2 DC on a main site, et 14 DCs which are located >> on 7 AD sites. >> I recently noticed in my DNS zones that my SOA record is associated >> to the last DC that was joined to the domain. >> But this DC is

Rowland, thank You, but this removes only the NS record, but the faulty domain A records remain. How to deal with them, I don't know. They behave unlike the ordinary A records. Name=, Records=8, Children=0     SOA: serial=27, refresh=900, retry=600, expire=86400, minttl=3600, ns=blacktux.interbronz.local., email=hostmaster.interbronz.local. (flags=600000f0, serial=27, ttl=3600)     NS: