DNS wizard

[lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell)]

On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 15:18, Sam Drinkard wrote:

> I'm no bind guru by any sort of means, and I know there were
> significant changes between bind 8 and bind 9.  I was more curious why
> it was considered lame server whereas prior to CentOS, it worked well,
> and was not considered lame under BSD.  Everything still works, but
> there are some warnings if you look at the report from
> http://dnsreport.com plugging in my domain name.  Part of that problem
> is upstream, which I can get corrected *I think* :-)

A 'lame server' means you are delegating (vs NS records) to
servers that don't respond for the zone you've specified.  NS
records in the wrong form would give that effect.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx