IPv4 & IPv6 named processes on a dual stack host

[Matthew Seaman]

On 24/05/2011 19:22, Timothy Stoddard wrote:
> Has any one run into a issue with two named processes running on the same
> host.  We want to begin serving up DNS on our IPv6 address space and do not
> want to duplicate each of our DNS servers.  We have started two named
> processes one with "-6" option.  All seems to be working.  I am concerned
> how journal files will be handled.  Question will the "-4" named process
> coexist with "-6" on the same box???

Curious. Why do you think you need two named processes?  One named
process is perfectly capable of listening and serving data on both IPv4
and IPv6 interfaces simultaneously.  So for instance this is from
named.conf on my own nameserver:

    listen-on {
        127.0.0.1;
        81.187.76.162;
    };
    listen-on-v6 {
        ::1;
        2001:8b0:151:1:e2cb:4eff:fe26:6481;
    };

There's nothing particularly special about the option flags I'm using --
pretty much the default FreeBSD settings other than the changes required
to run the ports version of bind rather than the base system one:

% grep named_ /etc/rc.conf
named_enable="YES"
named_program="/usr/local/sbin/named"
named_flags="-c /etc/namedb/named.conf"

Not that it makes much difference to this question, but I'm running
FreeBSD stable/8 running bind-9.8.0 from ports similarly to you.

	Cheers,

	Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                   7 Priory Courtyard
                                                  Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey     Ramsgate
JID: matthew at infracaninophile.co.uk               Kent, CT11 9PW

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 267 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20110524/04ca3147/attachment.bin>