On Jun 24, 2009, at 1:54 AM, Scott Haneda wrote:
On Jun 23, 2009, at 11:57 PM, Chris Buxton wrote:
On Jun 23, 2009, at 3:16 PM, Scott Haneda wrote:
Good observation. This is a long standing issue that I assumed was solved. Named on OS X will go deaf on port 53 tcp for some reason. I just kicked it, and now I can tcp dig it.

$dig +tcp sugardimplesdesigns.com SOA @ns1.hostwizard.com +short
ns1.hostwizard.com. scott.hostwizard.com. 2009062206 28800 7200 2419200 3600

I now the men and mice guys are familiar with this, if you guys are reading, have you ever pinned this down, or found a solution to it?

No, we have not. However, it appears to be related to the port being idle for some time. Servers that use their TCP port more frequently, usually due to having lots of zone updates that need to be replicated to slaves, don't appear to be affected. You might try creating a cron job that digs against the TCP port every 5 minutes to try to keep the port "active" and prevent it from gong deaf.

I could be wrong, but I seem to recall that we've seen this on other operating systems as well, although the lion's share of reports have been with Mac OS X.


In your estimation, a named/BIND bug, or OS level bug? How would one go about finding out, and working it out, so we can solve this? I can certainly and very easily shove a launchd job in to run every 5 minutes, and do not even consider it much of a kludge, but would like to solve it for others, as it is a bear to track down.

I'm not really qualified to determine where the bug is, but I would guess there's a bug in the IP stack that most other server software doesn't trigger. Perhaps ISC could find a way to work around it, or perhaps Apple could fix it.

My WAG is that Apple inherited this bug from *BSD, from which large portions of the Darwin kernel are (or at least were) derived.

Chris Buxton
Professional Services
Men & Mice

_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Reply via email to