Strange DNS PTR records

[Charles Tryon]

OK, I've partially answered my own question, but now I have another...

I found that I can remove the entire reverse lookup zone through the MS
tool, without it throwing fits or the exist/doesn't exist catch 22.

However, when I run my rebuild script to add the PTR records back in, I get
the following:

(these are the
/usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool dns zonecreate samba 4.10.in-addr.arpa
/usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool dns add samba 4.10.in-addr.arpa 25.0 PTR
something.mydomain.org
/usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool dns add samba 4.10.in-addr.arpa 26.0 PTR
nas1.mydomain.org
/usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool dns add samba 4.10.in-addr.arpa 100.2 PTR
vmhost.mydomain.org
etc...

Remember that I'm using a /19 subnet.  This creates folders for "0" and
"2", and then creates PTR records like 10.4.0.0.25 and 10.4.2.2.100.

I'm assuming my problem is in how I'm calling the samba-tool, but I'm not
clear on the directions for when you are working with something other than
a 255.255.255.0 subnet.



On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Charles Tryon <charles.tryon at gmail.com>wrote:

>
> Another question regarding DNS:
>
> I have a test domain I provisioned quite a while ago (probably shortly
> before the final 4.0.0 release, but I don't remember exactly when).  It is
> currently set up to use BIND 9.9 for DNS.  Most things are running fine on
> it (though admittedly it doesn't get pushed very hard).
>
> When I look at the domain using the DNS manager from Windows Remote
> Management Tools set (from a Win7 client), I the forward lookup zone looks
> fine, but I see a bunch of strange PTR records.  Almost all the PTR records
> have five octets rather than the normal four -- for example, 10.4.0.0.100,
> or 10.4.2.2.10.  In all cases, the third and fourth positions are the same.
>  (We are using a /19 subnet.)  The really bizarre thing is that if I try to
> delete the records, I get an error back that the records "do not exist."
>
> Is this an example of the "zombie DNS records" which I've seen mentioned
> here?
>
>  - If it is, what is the best way to clean this up?
>  - If I use the "samba_upgradedns" command, will that purge/rebuild/fix
> the DNS database, or will it simply change the front end (BIND vs.
> Internal) server which is looking at the same back end database?
>
> (Re-provisioning this box from scratch isn't entirely out of the question,
> since it is a test server, but it would be a big pain to reconstruct the
> domain, especially the machine accounts.  :-( )
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> --
>     Charles Tryon
> _________________________________________________________________________
>   “Risks are not to be evaluated in terms of the probability of success,
> but in terms of the value of the goal.”
>                 - Ralph D. Winter
>



-- 
    Charles Tryon
_________________________________________________________________________
  “Risks are not to be evaluated in terms of the probability of success,
but in terms of the value of the goal.”
                - Ralph D. Winter