SUMMARY: DNS problem, named shows "There may be a name server already running"

Date: Mon Jun 01 1998 - 20:04:15 CDT

Many thanks to those that responded. Running netstat -a did indeed show
that something (best guess was a zombie process??) was binding to port
53. Since I was able to reboot the machine I chose this option, which
has solved the problem. Subsequently, several people have suggested
using lsof to give more information, which I will grab and have handy
for next time.

I'm impressed with how many people knew the answer to this within
minutes, since I had Systems Engineeers from Sun looking at the problem
for a total of four hours over several days without any progress. Well
done again to those that replied.

Dale Wright
J B Were Stockbroking

P.S. Apologies to those that commented on the lengthy disclaimer, but
since our mail server is Windoze-based, I cant prevent it from being
appended to any outgoing mail.

Original question :

> I'm trying to set up a caching only server on an E3000 with Solaris
> 2.5.1, all the DNS config files look fine (confirmed by Sun). On startup
> of in.named, the messages file shows :
> Jun 1 12:03:30 jbwsun01 named[13759]: starting. named 4.9.3-P1
> Jun 1 12:03:45 jbwsun01 named[13759]: There may be a name server
> already running
> Jun 1 12:03:45 jbwsun01 named[13759]: exiting
> And there definitely isnt another name server running. Any ideas?


Were Stockbroking Limited, its directors, officers, employees, agents
and any entity distributing this document which is a related
body corporate ("Were") believe that the information contained in
this document is correct and that any opinions, conclusions or
recommendations contained in this document are reasonably held or
made as at the time of compilation. However, Were does not warrant
their accuracy and, save for any liability which cannot be excluded
and any rights which a person may have under the Trade Practices
Act 1974 and similar laws, disclaims all responsibility for any loss
or damage which may be suffered by any person directly or indirectly
through relying upon them whether that loss or damage is caused by any
fault or negligence on the part of Were or otherwise.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:12:41 CDT