On 01/05/2016 01:03 PM, Emmett Culley wrote: > I am seeing these lines for each domain in the systemd journal: > > zone relationship123.com/IN: loading from master file relationship123.com.db failed: file not found > zone relationship123.com/IN: not loaded due to errors. > _default/relationship123.com./IN: file not found > > > If I change the zone defs to include the full path: > > From > > zone "relationships123.com." IN { > type master; > file "relationships123.com.db"; > }; > > To > > zone "relationships123.com." IN { > type master; > file "/var/named/chroot/var/named/relationships123.com.db"; > }; > > in the config file, named starts, but then fails to provide DNS replies with the following error for each request: > > general: error: zone relationships123.com/IN: loading from master file /var/named/chroot/var/named/relationships123.com.db failed: file not found > general: error: zone relationships123.com/IN: not loaded due to errors. > > Nothing was changed in the named configuration prior to updating to 7.2 > > As usual I am using systemctl start named-chroot to start the server. > > Any ideas? > > Emmett I was able to get named to start and resolve DNS requests by creating two named.conf files. One in /etc/named.conf, that contains zone file definitions that included the absolute path to the zone file, like this: zone "relationships123.com." IN { type master; file "/var/named/chroot/var/named/relationships123.com.db"; }; And another in /var/named/chroot/etc/named.conf that contains zone file definitions with only the zone file name (no path). Like this: zone "relationships123.com." IN { type master; file "relationships123.com.db"; }; None of this makes sense to me as the previous configuration (that worked before upgrade to 7.2) used symbolic links in /etc to the files in /var/named/chroot/etc. While trying to figure this out I found, from the documentation, that if the named.conf file does not exist in the chroot structure, a copy of the file in /etc is "copied" to be used by the running chrooted server. Now, after updating to bind 9.9.4-29.el7_2.1 (CentOS 7.2) from bind 9.9.4-29.el7 (CentOS 7.1, latest) I have to use two separate files to get bind to initialize and run. Any ideas why I seem to be the only one seeing this? Emmett _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos