OK, I'm willing to listen. However, you have to start off by explaining why
it answers nslookup properly. Or why no resolution fails?
Like I said, if it functions and without someone using DIG, I have no idea
what is 'broke'. It's sat there for 6 months as a Win2K machine happily
answering DNS queries.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2893 5:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Delivery Failure- SOA?
> Well, the zone isn't broken. So, I'll have to disagree with DIG's
> opinion. It answers lookup requests properly. What more do I want
> DNS to do?
> I'll leave to Bill to get Win2K's DNS answering to DIG's satisfaction.
One of the most fundamental concepts of DNS:
It doesn't matter what tool you use. If the tool you use says it's broke,
it's broke.
DIG, just like NSLOOKUP, and any other tool you may possibly use to check
out your DNS (except on the name server itself) will report the same thing.
The only difference is the format.
If DIG connects to nameserver X and looks up information on domain Y, and
there is a problem with it, NSLOOKUP will also show the problem if it
connects to nameserver X and looks up information on domain Y.
As I mentioned, there are differences in output (DIG in Sam Spade shows the
responsible address in a SOA record converted to an E-mail address format,
whereas NSLOOKUP will show it in the original domain format). But if one
says you have a TTL of 3600 seconds, the other will say the same thing
(assuming you're talking to the same nameserver).
-Scott
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
