similar to: DNS backend

I set up two AD DC with external bind and it used to work for a while. Following a Bind9 upgrade named complained about missing SOA and NS records in the DLZ zones and could not be started anymore. Monday, due to a misinterpretation of some queries, I restarted Bind on the hitherto working system and I got the same error messages. No nothing changed - no changes in configuration, no updates.

Hello, is it possible to apply a strategy of horizontal fragmentation into the Active Directory? I mean, to store some amount of data in another DC, for example when the first DC is "full" Any idea? Felipe.

Hello list, I need to know which DNS backend is using my domain controller. Where can I search to know my backend ? Are there a command to do this? Then, I have 2 DCs replicating each other (samba-tool domain join). Is it possible to have one of them using SAMBA_internal and the other using BIND_DLZ ? Regards, Phillip.

Hello Marc, I'm referring to divide/fragment de Database AD (if possible). Trying to store a set of Data in a DC and another set of data in other DC... something like this. I ask that, because I've been asked for a strategy or mechanism related to the scalability which based on the horizontal fragmentation of AD. Then, Does AD have some type of mechanism for supporting the horizontal

On 28/01/15 18:56, support at remsnet.de wrote: > Hello Lars, > >> I set up two AD DC with external bind and it used to work for a while. >> Following a Bind9 upgrade named complained about missing SOA and NS >> records in the DLZ zones and could not be started anymore. >> >> Monday, due to a misinterpretation of some queries, I restarted Bind on >> the

Hi Rowland, Would you care to elaborate on that last sentence? I've not seen that mentioned before and I'm very curios about your reasons for saying it, especially as we're using internal DNS for our two DCs. regards, John On 29/02/16 06:18, Rowland penny wrote: > On 28/02/16 18:30, Felipe_G0NZÁLEZ_SANTIAG0 wrote: >> Hello list, I need to know which DNS backend is using

Hai, > > > > have rejoined all my DC's with new names, see below. > >;; ANSWER SECTION: > ><domain>.corp. 3600 IN NS psad101zatcrh.<domain>.corp. -> New > >rebuild, new hostname, RHEL6 to RHEL7 upgrade .... > > > > Led me to believe this is your problem. However, you say it works on > > one DC, but not with multiple

On 02/12/15 11:59, mathias dufresne wrote: > Rowland, > > What did you request as DNS? Samba + Bind + DLZ ? > If yes, the fact your two DNS are replying "I am SOA" is a feature from > Bind9 or from DLZ patch. Yes, I use bind9 with the dlz backend. > > That's important as a standard Samba AD designed without Bind is using LDAP > defined entry for SOA. Asking

Last month I struggled with a severe DLZ issue and today I could solve it. Credits for the important idea go to Peter Serbe, thanks! I checked the DNS contents using RSAT. There was nothing wrong with SOA nor NS entries, but the reverse zones were actually forward zones with proper names in the in-addr.arpa. domain. I built proper reverse zones and deleted the forward-reverse zones and Bind

Hi Rowland, Thank you. Yes to the first point. We are using Bind9 but to continue using it is not necessarily set in stone. If using Samba Internal DNS makes more sense then we can do that too. The question is do we need to do dns-upgrade and use Internal DNS, pre-migration? Then use internal dns during the classic migration? Also, I assume the bind9 service will have to stopped if infact we

On 02/12/15 10:31, mj wrote: >> I can find on the internet multiple instances of 'every DC running dns >> should have a SOA record', but I cannot find any concrete examples of an >> ldif that shows this. Does each DC have a separate SOA record in AD, or >> is there just one SOA record and the DC just claims to be the SOA, or is >> there just one SOA record

I had configured Samba AD's with Bind9_DLZ in all DC. But for some reason (i couldn't determine) three (sambadc02,03,04) AD's responded very slowly . So change to Samba_Internal backend into the servers with problem and works fine. sambadc01 -> with FSMO roles - Bind9_DLZ sambadc02 -> Samba_Internal sambadc03 -> Samba_Internal sambadc04 -> Samba_Internal My question is:

Dear Roland, and here we have one reasons / prove regarding Debian and current Samba BIND DLZ issues : http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/b/bind9/bind9_9.8.4.dfsg.P1-6+nmu2+deb7u3_changelog MSG >> " * disable dlz until we get a patch to make it build again" Well Debian Maintainers seems seeking missing the dlz patches that RHEL & SLES maintainers created

Hi, I'm having the following issue when trying to switch from samba_internal to bind9_dlz. I have been following the procedure here: https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Changing_the_DNS_backend# Changing_from_Samba_Internal_DNS_to_BIND_DLZ I get the following: [root at dc2 ~]# /usr/local/sbin/samba_upgradedns --dns-backend=BIND9_DLZ Reading domain information Segmentation fault (core dumped)

On Wed, 7 Feb 2018 10:02:10 +0000 Praveen Ghimire <PGhimire at sundata.com.au> wrote: > Hi Rowland, > > Following the > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Changing_the_DNS_Back_End_of_a_Samba_AD_DC, > ran some tests migrating from Bind9 to Samba Internal with the > following results > > Stopped the BIND, Samba-AD-DC services > > samba_upgradedns

Dear all, I have a few question regarding to DNS and upgrading from Samba 4.1.17 to 4.4.2. After reading about the Badlock Bug, I feel the urge to upgrade my Samba installation and to move from BIND9_FLATFILE to SAMBA_INTERNAL_DNS. I am using Samba version 4.1.17. During provisioning (some years ago) I have decided to use BIND9_FLATFILE. At this moment I would like to upgrade to Samba 4.4.2 and

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 16:59:51 +0200 mathias dufresne via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I never had a look on MS AD regarding that, to check if NS record is > created for each DC running DNS service or not. I couldn't find anything that explicitly says that each DC should have its own SOA in AD. What I could find was that each AD-integrated zone on a DC

Hi, I just did a new provision of my samba domain and now the formerly working bind 9.10 + dlz setup does no longer work. When trying to start bind9 it quits with the following error: named[5818]: samba_dlz: started for DN DC=mydomain,DC=de named[5818]: samba_dlz: starting configure named[5818]: dns_rdata_fromtext: buffer-0x7f9bc9231ec0:1: near 'srv2..': empty label named[5818]: Failed

Answering to previous mail: AD is hearth of infrastructure. That's where all accounts are stored. That last affirmation implies few times after you start deploying AD most of your IT infrastructure depends on AD (all applications need accounts, they are in AD, no AD, no accounts, nothing work) and that you take security in consideration and that you do that seriously: an attacker with

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