bind 9.2.1 ON rh9
Mark Andrews
Mark_Andrews at isc.org
Tue Oct 31 21:28:10 UTC 2006
> Thanks Mark and Kevin,
>
> This helps.. we are thinking we will upgrade to 9.2.4 at minimum.
BIND 9.2.4 is also past its "use by" date.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bind-users-bounce at isc.org [mailto:bind-users-bounce at isc.org] On
> Behalf Of Mark Andrews
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 5:28 PM
> To: Kevin Darcy
> Cc: bind-users at isc.org
> Subject: Re: bind 9.2.1 ON rh9
>
>
> > Mueller, Rex wrote:
> > > We need to look into a problem, can you point in a direction in
> which to
> > > look?
> > >
> > >
> > > We are having a problem on a box that acts as our primary DNS
> machine
> > > running Redhat 9.0 and BIND 9.2.1.. Periodically it quits replying
> to
> > > DNS requests, we clear the cache with rndc flush, sometimes, that
> does
> > > not work we have to kill -9 named processes. and restart. Sometimes
> it
> > > hangs and halts the system altogether.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I've looked in /var/log/messages there are RRSets and some
> lameserver
> > > entries but we can't seem to isolate what the problem truly is.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The hardware is a Dell server, it'd had been working fine for a
> couple
> > > of year and as it was we'd have to rndc flush periodically (once per
> > > month..) now it is occuring daily. Sometimes to the point of halting
> the
> > > box. Can't say whether it's hardware or software.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Can we put our primary DNS address (via ifconfig) to the secondary
> and
> > > take the primary offline to do hardware diagnostics?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At this point we are baffled and need some assistance. Any insight
> from
> > > the group would be greatly appreciated..
> > >
> > 1. BIND 9.2.1 is pretty old at this point. I'd upgrade that,
> regardless
> > of whether it's the fix to your problem or not.
> > 2. If an rndc flush helps some of the time, my knee-jerk reaction is
> to
> > say you're experiencing some sort of memory starvation issue. You
> didn't
> > give any indication of how much memory you have in the box, how much
> > named uses typically, query volume/patterns, memory usage statistics
> > over a given period of time, etc. so I'm left to reckless speculation
> on
> > that front.
>
> I would say that these represent broken delegations. Something
> on the parent side does not match something on the child side.
> e.g.
> NS RRset and/or address records sets for the nameservers
> or NS RRset and/or address records where the nameservers
> live
> or NS RRset and/or address records where the nameservers'
> nameservers live
> or ...
>
> > 3. If this problem "halts the system altogether", then, my second
> > knee-jerk reaction is to say that this goes beyond a mere DNS-software
>
> > problem, and enters the realm of OS (kernel-level) and/or hardware
> > problem. Unless perhaps RedHat 9.0 is *really* bad at dealing with
> > memory-starvation conditions (in which case it might just be
> symptomatic).
>
> This sounds like memory starvation though you should get log
> messages to that effect.
>
> > 4. Can you migrate the address of your primary DNS server to another
> > box, so that you can do diagnostics, without disrupting your clients?
> > That's not even really a DNS question. It all depends on your
> > LAN/switch/router/firewall configuration/topology. I have no idea what
>
> > devices or paths are used between the clients and servers in your
> > network, and what the configurations/rules that those devices might be
>
> > using or not using...
> >
> >
>
> > - Kevin
> >
> >
> --
> Mark Andrews, ISC
> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at isc.org
>
>
>
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at isc.org
More information about the bind-users
mailing list