because you are replying to their personal address?? try "reply to all" then delete all but the list address? On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 21:12:18+1200 Robert Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sometimes when I reply to a list message it only goes to the sender. > Why is this? > > -----Forwarded Message----- > From: Robert Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Paradise spam + virus filtering > Date: 01 Sep 2003 21:07:28 +1200 > > Shane, how about correcting your time - my emails are sorted by > date/time sent so yours are always out of order. > > On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 03:13, Shane Hollis wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 01:49:12PM +0000, Shane Hollis wrote: > > > > sigh ... i didn't explain myself fully enough ... my concern is > > > > not with lookups but with changes in caches. I have had a number > > > > of situations where caching has resulted in DNS changes being a > > > > pain in the neck and not propogating correctly. This is > > > > especially true when working with overseas clients. > > > > > > > > To sit on the backbone in the USA gives me a quicker > > > > dissemination of changes to DNS entries. The lookups are > > > > heirarchical .. this I know, as you have mentioned you look up > > > > the closes and work outwards until you find it but caching > > > > sometimes mucks this up and so to make changes it is easier to > > > > start with the main servers and work down to the smaller > > > > servers, not the other way around. > > >....> > > > I'm afraid I'm with both Nick and David again... > > > > > > I think you've got yourself all confused, since location has no > > > bearing whatsoever on how fast or slow DNS changes take effect... > > Yes it does ... the more 'authorative' a dns server the more > > 'non-authorative' DNs servers it affects. I explain it more fully > > in another email. > > > > At the risk of repeating myself. .... If I change a DNS entry on a > > server in my bedroom that affects my domain then the change has to > > go to another dNS upstream of me ( maybe my ISP ) then that pushes > > changes upstream ... until eventually it hits someone upstream of > > your ISP (maybe Waikato) who then tells your isp who then tells you. > > If I had told the DNS at Waikato then you would have known faster > > than me teling my server, or isp or their isp. > > > > Here is a table of two changes possibilities. I will assume a change > > time of 1 hour for refreshing cahes on all machines. I will also > > asume a worst case senario where every downstram server queries an > > upstream server one minute before the upstream server refreshs its > > cache. Change time is 00:00 hours. > > > > There are five servers involved: > > My server at home(Me1) > > My ISP (Me2) > > Waikato (W) > > Your ISP (You2) > > Your server (You1) > > > > For me to refresh Me1 and to get changes to you would look like > > this....no changes pushed, relies on boradcast requests for changes > > > > Time Server Time_change_Registers > > 00:00 Me1 00:00 > > 01:00 Me2 Told by Me1 when asked for changes and > > queried > > my DNS 02:00 Waikato Changes as asked me2 or me1 > > 02:59 you2 Told by waikato when asking for changes > > 03:58 You1 Told when asking you2 > > > > Total time for You1 to change is 3:58:00 > > > > > > For me to refresh Me1 and to get changes to you would look like > > this....with changes pushed to other servers > > Time Server Time_change_Registers > > 00:00 Me1 00:00 > > 00:00 you2 No change as asked waikato and waikato > > didn't > > know 00:01 Me2 00:01 Told by Me1 - I am being generous > > and pushing the change 00:02 W 00:02 Told By > > Me2 - > > Waikato is being generous and pushing a change 00:59 you1 > > > > No change as you have queried You2 01:00 you2 > > Changes as asked > > Waikato 01:59 you1 Changes to DNS as you1 asked > > You2 which > > is now changed > > > > Total time for you1 was 1:59:00 > > Total time for me1 was 00:00 > > > > For me to refresh waikato the change looks like: > > Time Server Time_change_Registers > > 00:00 W Changed at 00:00 > > 00:00 you2 Knows as asked Waikato > > 00:59 you1 Knows as asked you2 > > > > Total time for you2 to change is 00:59 > > Half the time in a short chain of change with no pushes of the > > changes. > > > > In routing terms you normally push a change to the most authorative > > server first and let it filter down from there. If I want to start > > a rumour I don't tell Mary Hide at home, I tell Paul I'll broadcast > > this crud to everyone Holmes. Same way, if I want to make routing > > changes or major, world wide effective DNS changes start in the most > > authorative place I can ... for me this would possibly be Pacfic > > ARIN type server or the US depending on what it caches and how > > quickly I want changes to replicate. > > > > I have changed my domain in the US and been up and running with > > other clients receiving changes in less than 15 minutes. It wouldn't > > happen if I only changed things at paradise or at home. It all > > dpepnds on how authorative the server you are asking and how much > > you trust their cache.... > > > > The other factor in all this is the stability and up time of the > > network ... the backbone in the US is always up (comparitively), > > collects more traffic and is faster. There are more users in the US > > and more important servers there. Same thing as spreading the > > plague. Better off to do it in a crowded mall in a large density > > population of a huge city with excellent communting and many > > connections than in the corner dairy on Goslow Street, Brunner. > > > > My numbers above are probably out, I have the headache from hell but > > they get the point across. > > Hope this clarifies things... > -- > Robert Fisher > www.fisherfamily.orcon.net.nz > -- > Robert Fisher > www.fisherfamily.orcon.net.nz > > >
