no IPv6 interfaces found

[Jeroen van Meeuwen]

Marten, Jim,

In an attempt to solve the original issue:

Marten, do you have IPv6 support compiled into the kernel?

Jim, since you're the most experienced by far, am I correct to presume BIND
wouldn't be able to check for IPv6 interfaces, when the system it's running
on doesn't have a clue what IPv6 is, let alone return 'no interfaces'? So
BIND wouldn't report errors or notices anymore?

Kind regards,

kanarip

> -----Original Message-----
> From: bind-users-bounce at isc.org 
> [mailto:bind-users-bounce at isc.org] On Behalf Of Jim Reid
> Sent: dinsdag 24 augustus 2004 11:02
> To: Marten Lehmann
> Cc: bind-users at isc.org
> Subject: Re: no IPv6 interfaces found 
> 
> >>>>> "Marten" == Marten Lehmann <lehmann at cnm.de> writes:
> 
>     >> My laptop! It runs a name server and changes its interface
>     >> address(es) depending on what network it's connected to.
> 
>     Marten> It's your decision but in my eyes that's stupid. Why can't
>     Marten> you just use DHCP like all others do and use the
>     Marten> nameservers of your provider? 
> 
> I do use DHCP to get addressing and routing info. But I run 
> my own name server and always use that for a number of reasons:
> 
> [1] I use/need a specific version of BIND: eg, a 9.3 beta.
> 
> [2] It slaves copies of my local zones which I want to have 
> immediate access to.
> 
> [3] I sometimes use DNSSEC and have to configure trust 
> anchors that won't be on some random name server.
> 
> [4] My laptop's name server has a trust relationship with 
> other name servers.
> 
> [5] I'm better at running a name server than some provider.
> 
> [6] I don't want to be exposed to all sorts of weirdness that 
> might live in someone else's DNS setup: wildcard TLDs, 
> forwarding silliness, bogus TLDs, fake root zones, etc, etc.
> 
> [7] Relying on an unknown name server that might be running 
> buggy code is not wise.
> 
> 
> So there are plenty of valid reasons why mobile devices can 
> and will run a name server. You might not appreciate those 
> reasons. But that doesn't make them any less valid. They just 
> don't apply to you.
>