On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:

> On Monday 25 August 2003 02:50 pm, Ken Schweigert wrote:
> [ dns3.elan.net ]
>
> > This means that the DNS administrator forgot to set up a reverse entry for
> > this IP address.  There are many domains just like this all over the net.
> > My observation came from a DNS that was improperly configured; it looped.
> > I'm sure there are quite a few of these, too.  However it shouldn't bork
> > Analog.
>
> For one thing you could try recompiling with -DNOALARM as someone already
> suggested -- analog uses alarm()/SIGALRM to time out long lookups.
>
> But we should really preprocess logs with some kind of fast resolver instead.
>

I agree that analog's built-in DNS lookups aren't the right solution for
most people running it regularly -- but they should still work right.

I'm very confused about this, because I can't reproduce it on Debian Linux
or on Solaris 8.

Here's one thought. If you run analog a second time, does it fail at the
same place, or does it resolve more names the second time? I'm wondering if
the lookup which I've timed out is somehow blocking any more lookups.
Compiling with -DNOALARM is also a good experiment for that theory.

Of course, if anyone wants to take the time to step through a debugger and
see what the DNS calls are returning, I would be very grateful, but I'm not
going to ask anyone to do that because it's a bit of a chore.

-- 
Stephen Turner, Cambridge, UK    http://homepage.ntlworld.com/adelie/stephen/
 "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than
  the question of whether a submarine can swim."  (Edsger W. Dijkstra)


+------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list:
|    http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help/unsubscribe.html
|
|  Digest version: http://lists.isite.net/listgate/analog-help-digest/
|  Usenet version: news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.analog.general
|  List archives:  http://www.analog.cx/docs/mailing.html#listarchives
+------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to