Problem getting bind to work in 2.2

volkans80

Thanks for your help.

I also found my mistake and add NS record and it works now.

johnpoz

@kejianshi those are for unbound, they are asking about BIND

kejianshi

haha - Thats what I get for not paying attention! :-\

johnpoz

Well the one guy thanked you. Guess he isn't paying much attention either ;) hehehe

kejianshi

He was being polite to the idiot (me)

johnpoz

What I don't get is if the guy just needs a mx record why not just do it in unbound

In the advanced section
local-data: "example.com. 86400 IN MX 10 mail.example.com."

Then there you go – mx record..

C:>dig example.com mx

; <<>> DiG 9.10-P2 <<>> example.com mx
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 47104
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;example.com. IN MX

;; ANSWER SECTION:
example.com. 86400 IN MX 10 mail.example.com.

;; Query time: 3 msec
;; SERVER: 192.168.1.253#53(192.168.1.253)
;; WHEN: Thu Feb 12 06:42:38 Central Standard Time 2015
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 61

kejianshi

Not sure - He has probably been running BIND for years and didn't want to leave the devil he knows?

Nothing wrong with BIND.

johnpoz

Im a big fan of it as well - but seems like a lot of work to get a mx record ;) The way I read his post pfsense was working, which I assume he was either using the resolver or forwarder with and just needed a way to get a mx record for a local domain. Trying to install bind seems like a pain when it takes click click to get a simple mx record.

TeddyPace

keeping pay attention to this topic ;D ;D ;D

samsung galaxy A7 case
Samsung Galaxy Note Edge case

tristram

@johnpoz:

What I don't get is if the guy just needs a mx record why not just do it in unbound

In the advanced section
local-data: "example.com. 86400 IN MX 10 mail.example.com."

Then there you go – mx record..

C:>dig example.com mx

; <<>> DiG 9.10-P2 <<>> example.com mx
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 47104
;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;example.com. IN MX

;; ANSWER SECTION:
example.com. 86400 IN MX 10 mail.example.com.

;; Query time: 3 msec
;; SERVER: 192.168.1.253#53(192.168.1.253)
;; WHEN: Thu Feb 12 06:42:38 Central Standard Time 2015
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 61

Thanks I'll give it a go. (As it happens I did what I should've done in the first place and kept the dns off the firewall.)

Yes, I only needed a single MX record (but now my lab is getting larger). And yes, as someone commented, I have used bind for years - but I'm always open to try new ways of skinning the virtual cat :)

kejianshi

Unbound is simple - I'm sure you can handle it with ease.