When I started using Linux almost 20 years ago, I think there was only nslookup, and no dig. So by habit, I tend to use it unless the extra power of dig outweighs its extra complexity. I don't remember what I used on Windows back when I was regularly using both.
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 11:42:20 -0600 Grant Taylor via bind-users <bind-users@lists.isc.org> wrote: > On 08/18/2018 07:25 AM, Bob McDonald wrote: > > I don't think anyone hates nslookup (well maybe a few do <grin>) I > > suppose the immense dislike stems from the fact that it's the > > default utility under Windows. Folks who use dig as their default > > realize that when used properly, dig provides much more > > functionality than nslookup. For example, try using TSIG with > > nslookup or getting a NSID response. These are only a couple of > > examples. There's other reasons to change. The output from dig is > > much more comprehensive. And, yes, if you install the bind tools > > from ISC under Windows, dig works quite well. > > I've been told that nslookup will lie and provide incorrect > information in some situations. I have no idea what situations that > is. I would love to learn what they are. > > If you know of such an example, please enlighten me. > > As such, I tend to use nslookup on platforms without dig when or > until I have reason to not do so. > > > _______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
