SUMMARY: Error message relating to named

Date: Fri Apr 17 1998 - 17:32:02 CDT

     I think I did not post the summary correctly the first time.
     So, here is the SUMMARY again. Sorry for the duplicate message.
     Thank you very much for all the incoming responses on this DNS error
     messages. Again, this list members have shown me how wonderful this
     list members are.
     The solution:
     Most of people suggest replace the host name entries with "_" to "-"
     and the error message disappeared.
     According to RFC, it is illegal to use underscore in the host name. By
     definition from RFC's, internet names may only consist of alphanumeric
     characters, the hyphen, and the period.
     Here is the original post:
     To All Helpers:
     I am running solaris 2.6 on Sun Ultra-2. >
     Here is the messages log entries and I could not seem to find a >
     solution to resolve them.
     The DNS is working fine, I can lookup each name and the server retruns
     with correct ip address, I can ping the ip address and it tells me it
     is alive.
     Apr 14 12:18:38 xxxxx named[475]: owner name " m
     IN" (secondary) is invalid - proceeding anyway
     Apr 14 12:18:38 xxxxx last message repeated 1 time
     Apr 14 12:18:38 xxxxx named[475]: host name "
     IN" (secondary) is invalid - proceeding anyway
     Apr 14 12:18:38 xxxxx named[475]: owner name
     om IN" (secondary) is invalid - proceeding anyway Apr 14 12:18:38
     xxxxx last message repeated 1 time
     Apr 14 12:18:38 xxxxx named[475]: host name " m
     IN" (secondary) is invalid - proceeding anyway
     Apr 14 12:18:38 xxxxx named[475]: owner name "
     Thanks to following people for their suggestions:
     Rik Schneider
     Kevin Maher
     Derek Schatz
     David Thorburn
     Michael Hill
     Ken from
     Bismark Espinoza
     Floyd, Randall D.
     Louis Hoo
     Joel from
     Reto Lichtensteiger
     Stephen Tremain
     Shriman Gurung
     Casper Dik
     And finally for those sending the message after I have posted this
     summary and left out your names.
     Comment from Floyd, Randall D.:
     Your problem is the underscore in your hostnames. The illegal use of
     the underscore in host names is now strictly adhered to in the version
     of BIND that comes with Solaris 2.6. This is in accordance with RFC
     952, in which host naming rules are defined. I guess that the
     compiled distribution of BIND that Solaris 2.5.1 shipped with ignored
     this naming rule. I experimented with copying in.named from a Solaris
     2.5.1 box to a 2.6 box to "get around" this problem, and it seemed to
     work just fine. But, don't take my word as gospel; I didn't stress
     test it or anything.
     Comments from David Thorburn:
     Names with '_' in them, per RFC 922, are not valid, and the resolve
     libraries on 2.6 care (while the 2.5.1 and earlier libraries didn't).
     This has caused us extensive problems, and I've managed to work out
     the following hypotheses:
     - pre-2.6 machiens work as you have come to know simply
     because their libraries are lenient; it seems that the 2.6
     library routines are strictly complying with the RFC and cannot
     "understand" the response they get back from DNS when resolving
     (telnet, ping, etc) a *_* hostname
     - of course, on any Solaris rev, nslookup (a true DNS program) is
     - 2.6 machines cannot resolve (telnet, ping, etc) *_* names
     through DNS
     - 2.6 machines can try to query DNS and, upon failure, continue on
     to YP without breaking (this is Very Good)
     - if your machine name is presented as *_* anywhere through the
     resolution process -- whether resolving a *_* name, or resolving a
     non-*_* name that is an alias of a *_* canonical name -- then you
     will get a DNS failure
     - 2.6 machines can resolve (telnet, ping, etc) *_* names
     through YP, even if your YP simply forwards on to DNS
     - a 2.6 YP server cannot resolve (telnet, ping, etc) *_*
     names through DS, but can forward requests to DNS through *itself* as
     a YP server
     - it matters not whether your YP and/or DNS servers are
     running 2.6; they still work.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:12:37 CDT