[Samba] samba 4.1.4 bind9 putrr: unhandled record type 0
L.P.H. van Belle
belle at bazuin.nl
Mon Jan 20 02:01:03 MST 2014
In responce to..
>-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>Van: Günter Kukkukk [mailto:linux at kukkukk.com]
>Verzonden: zondag 19 januari 2014 5:00
>Aan: L.P.H. van Belle
>CC: samba at lists.samba.org
>Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] samba 4.1.4 bind9 putrr: unhandled record type 0
>
>Am 17.01.2014 08:52, schrieb L.P.H. van Belle:
>
>Hello Louis,
>
>> Hello Günter,
>>
>> Tell me what you need, and i'll try to get it to you.
>> The server has a windows 2008R2 as master DC. ( and 2 samba
>servers, bot same error(s) )
>>
>> the relation to this error..
>> i upgraded from 4.1.3 to 4.1.4
>
>so you say it did not happen with 4.1.3 ?
Yes it did happen with 4.1.3 but only 2 messages every 10 minutes, now after 4.1.4 about 30 a second.
I did revert back to 4.1.3 but to bad it didnt work, now still about 30 messages a second.
>
>Or did you also change/enable some (tombstone) DNS Scavenging settings
>on the windows 2008R2 server in the meantime?
Order of what happend.
1 window server install ( with dns+dhcp ) ( 3 years ago )
2 samba4 DC Join AD ( 1 months ago )
3 other samba4 DC Join AD ( 1 months ago )
4 enabled scavaging on the windows (3 weeks ago)
5 about 2 messages every 10 minutes. ( as of join)
6 upgraded to 4.1.4, now 30 messages a sec. ( after upgrade )
7 reverted back, didnt works. ( last friday )
8 disabled scavaging again. ( last friday )
9 looked at logs today, still the same.. :-(
>
>I'll try to get the same
> named: samba b9_putrr: unhandled record type 0
>info logged here, too.
>
>I already locally modified dlz_bind9.c to get some additional
>info logged whether it happens during
> dlz_addrdataset or
> dlz_subrdataset
>That tombstone record passes a NTTIME value ....
>Probably we need to take some action when that tombstone record
>is passed - atm it's ignored.
Message parts of : samba-tool drs showrepl
( tested from samba4server1 ( DC in AD)
==== INBOUND NEIGHBORS ====
DC=ForestDnsZones,DC= ... etc
Default-First-Site-Name\WINDOWS SERVER
Last attempt @ Mon Jan 20 09:44:12 2014 CET was successful
0 consecutive failure(s).
Last success @ Mon Jan 20 09:44:12 2014 CET
DC=ForestDnsZones,DC= ....
Default-First-Site-Name\Samba4Server2 via RPC
Last attempt @ Mon Jan 20 09:44:13 2014 CET failed, result 2 (WERR_BADFILE)
791 consecutive failure(s).
Last success @ Thu Jan 16 11:37:48 2014 CET
all samba 2 samba have result 2 (WERR_BADFILE)
all samba to windows result successfull
==== OUTBOUND NEIGHBORS ====
DC=ForestDnsZones,DC=......
Default-First-Site-Name\samba4server2
Last attempt @ Mon Jan 20 09:47:17 2014 CET failed, result 2 (WERR_BADFILE)
47256 consecutive failure(s).
Last success @ NTTIME(0)
DC=Mydomain ...
Default-First-Site-Name\Windows server
Last attempt @ Fri Jan 17 16:28:16 2014 CET was successful
0 consecutive failure(s).
Last success @ Fri Jan 17 16:28:16 2014 CET
DC=Mydomain ...
Default-First-Site-Name\LinuxServer
Last attempt @ Mon Jan 20 09:47:18 2014 CET failed, result 2 (WERR_BADFILE)
47253 consecutive failure(s).
Last success @ NTTIME(0)
and i noticed a change here.
==== KCC CONNECTION OBJECTS ====
TransportType: RPC
options: 0x00000001
Warning: No NC replicated for Connection!
Both windows and linux reported No NC replicated for connection... BUT !!!
After the second join of my Samba4 DC, these messages were going.
Before the upgrade ==== KCC CONNECTION OBJECTS ==== reported everything OK.
Even the NC replicated message was going..
>We'll see.
>
>Cheers, Günter
>
>>
>> and there are a lots of these messages is see..
>> since the logrotate this morning.. about 53574 messages..
>>
>> Just tell me what to do and i'll get it for you.
>>
>> Thank you for helping out.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Louis
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>>> Van: Günter Kukkukk [mailto:linux at kukkukk.com]
>>> Verzonden: vrijdag 17 januari 2014 2:51
>>> Aan: L.P.H. van Belle
>>> CC: samba at lists.samba.org
>>> Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] samba 4.1.4 bind9 putrr: unhandled
>record type 0
>>>
>>> Am 16.01.2014 12:03, schrieb L.P.H. van Belle:
>>>> Hai,
>>>>
>>>> In seeing these messages in my logs,
>>>>
>>>> named: samba b9_putrr: unhandled record type 0
>>>>
>>>> Everything looks and works ok, but i can find what the above
>>> message means and/or if its harmfull.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Greetz.
>>>>
>>>> Louis
>>>>
>>>
>>>from the following list the samba DLZ dns driver implementation does
>>> atm handle the marked 10 record types:
>>>
>>> DNS_TYPE_TOMBSTONE=(int)(0x0),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_A=(int)(0x1),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_NS=(int)(0x2),
>>> DNS_TYPE_MD=(int)(0x3),
>>> DNS_TYPE_MF=(int)(0x4),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_CNAME=(int)(0x5),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_SOA=(int)(0x6),
>>> DNS_TYPE_MB=(int)(0x7),
>>> DNS_TYPE_MG=(int)(0x8),
>>> DNS_TYPE_MR=(int)(0x9),
>>> DNS_TYPE_NULL=(int)(0xA),
>>> DNS_TYPE_WKS=(int)(0xB),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_PTR=(int)(0xC),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_HINFO=(int)(0xD),
>>> DNS_TYPE_MINFO=(int)(0xE),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_MX=(int)(0xF),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_TXT=(int)(0x10),
>>> DNS_TYPE_RP=(int)(0x11),
>>> DNS_TYPE_AFSDB=(int)(0x12),
>>> DNS_TYPE_X25=(int)(0x13),
>>> DNS_TYPE_ISDN=(int)(0x14),
>>> DNS_TYPE_RT=(int)(0x15),
>>> DNS_TYPE_SIG=(int)(0x18),
>>> DNS_TYPE_KEY=(int)(0x19),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_AAAA=(int)(0x1C),
>>> DNS_TYPE_LOC=(int)(0x1D),
>>> DNS_TYPE_NXT=(int)(0x1E),
>>> => DNS_TYPE_SRV=(int)(0x21),
>>> DNS_TYPE_ATMA=(int)(0x22),
>>> DNS_TYPE_NAPTR=(int)(0x23),
>>> DNS_TYPE_DNAME=(int)(0x27),
>>> DNS_TYPE_DS=(int)(0x2B),
>>> DNS_TYPE_RRSIG=(int)(0x2E),
>>> DNS_TYPE_NSEC=(int)(0x2F),
>>> DNS_TYPE_DNSKEY=(int)(0x30),
>>> DNS_TYPE_DHCID=(int)(0x31),
>>> DNS_TYPE_ALL=(int)(0xFF),
>>> DNS_TYPE_WINS=(int)(0xFF01),
>>> DNS_TYPE_WINSR=(int)(0xFF02)
>>> -----
>>>
>>> or in other words:
>>>
>>> } dns_typemap[] = {
>>> { DNS_TYPE_A, "A" , false},
>>> { DNS_TYPE_AAAA, "AAAA" , false},
>>> { DNS_TYPE_CNAME, "CNAME" , true},
>>> { DNS_TYPE_TXT, "TXT" , false},
>>> { DNS_TYPE_PTR, "PTR" , false},
>>> { DNS_TYPE_SRV, "SRV" , false},
>>> { DNS_TYPE_MX, "MX" , false},
>>> { DNS_TYPE_HINFO, "HINFO" , false},
>>> { DNS_TYPE_NS, "NS" , false},
>>> { DNS_TYPE_SOA, "SOA" , true},
>>> };
>>> ------
>>>
>>> So the failing one you notice is:
>>> DNS_TYPE_TOMBSTONE=(int)(0x0)
>>>
>>> I'm atm searching how all this tombstone (is deleted) stuff
>>> should be handled correctly...
>>>
>>> Do you see any correlation, when this message is written to the log?
>>> Could help to setup a testcase! :-)
>>>
>>> Btw - the _internal_ samba dns server is a completely separate
>>> implementation.
>>>
>>> Cheers, Günter
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>
>
More information about the samba
mailing list