Large Zone transfer from Bind 8/9 - W2K

[Danny Mayer]

At 08:13 AM 9/5/02, Jeffery Jones wrote:

>On 5 Sep 2002 02:06:14 -0000, Danny Mayer <mayer at gis.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >At 08:47 PM 9/4/02, Jeffery Jones wrote:
> >> I am unable to upgrade
> >>the Bind 8.33 master to a Bind 9.2.0 master because it eventually
> >>stops resolving external zones under Win32.   Does the current beta
> >>release candidate BIND 9.2.2rc1 correct this problem under Win32?
> >
> >I am unaware of any problem that would cause it to stop resolving external
> >zones under Win32.  How do you know that it isn't?  Did you run dig against
> >the box and get timeouts instead of a response? Did you use fully qualified
> >domain names? Are the authorative nameservers lame? Do you have a
> >firewall problem? Are all queries to external zones timedout or just some of
> >them?
>
>
>   The following threads have more info along with at least one other 
> person who has
>seen a similar problem.
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=agcl6i%245nvv%241%40isrv4.isc.org&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26q%3D%2522jeffery%2Bjones%2522%2Bbind%2Brecursive%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=agf518%2479b7%241%40isrv4.isc.org&rnum=2&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26q%3D%2522jeffery%2Bjones%2522%2Bbind%2Brecursive%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch

Yes, I've exchanged mail with Bjorn a number of times of various issues.


>   The "No more recursive clients"error is suspicious since Bind 8.33 
> never misses a beat
>in the same environment.    Increasing the recursive-clients settings 
>caused it to eventually
>just stop resolving external domain names without even logging an error.

The "No more recursive clients" error is not unusual in BIND 9 and is not 
specific
to Win32.  You can increase the limit by adding to your options section:
recursive-clients 2000;
for example.  The default is 1000.

>  I  was using NSLookup at the time, and it got an immediate reply
>for all external domain names that indicated failure.    I'll set it up 
>again with 9.22 so that I'm paged next
>time it fails and get better diagnostics with DIG, and dump the cache to 
>see if some names are
>present in cache but not returned.

Danny