Re: Bind 9.1.0

["Dick St.Peters" <stpeters () NETHEAVEN COM>]

> Has anyone seen any problems with Bind 8.9.1?  I am about to take it into a
> production enviornment, I would just like to know if anyone has had any
> problems with it.

BIND 9.1.0 (as in your subject line) works fine here, with the
inevitable quirks.

The main quirk bothering me is that when an IP address has multiple
PTR records, 9.1.0 defaults to returning them in random order and does
not yet implement the rrset-order directive to change that.  Our mail
server's IP has five reverse resolutions, so sendmail sees a match
between the name supplied in the EHLO greeting and the reverse
resolved IP only 1/5th the time.  This is the main reason I haven't
fully deployed it yet.  (It's running on our principal secondary and
on some internal servers but not on our primary.)

If you secondary for anyone using Dan Bernstein's tinydns, they will
need to apply a patch available on the tinydns site.  BIND 9 is unable
to do zone transfers from unpatched tinydns.

--
Dick St.Peters, stpeters () NetHeaven com
Gatekeeper, NetHeaven, Saratoga Springs, NY
Saratoga/Albany/Amsterdam/BoltonLanding/Cobleskill/Greenwich/
GlensFalls/LakePlacid/NorthCreek/Plattsburgh/...
    Oldest Internet service based in the Adirondack-Albany region