O sometimes just mention it so we pple don't go off topic Wait am abit stubborn if I may ask, have you tried interrogating  another nameserver at the same time? like demon.mtn.co.ug they are friendly 4 we all blame Bind will give another clue incase the problem persists!! :)>-
Ronny
*******************************************************************
PGP Fingerprint: 6695 794A B84E D922 88FB 73CC 6CBD 8036 B3CD 7304
We can't become what we need to be by remaining what we are
*******************************************************************





joseph mpora wrote:
Thanks for the educative replies. I wasn't basing all my observation
on google's domains, I just listed it as an example.

I appreciate the squid tips but I think the problem lies with bind and
I still can't figure out why it would produce a SERVFAIL on a domain
it was able to resolve just a few minutes ago.

Guess it's time for a rebuild

On 1/17/06, Mark Tinka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  
On Tuesday 17 January 2006 12:24, Ronny wrote:

    
    * caching of DNS lookups
------------>http://www.squid-cache.org/ I don't know
if it's what you mean
      
Check out:

http://www.squid-cache.org/Doc/FAQ/FAQ-4.html#ss4.10

As well as 4.11, which follows.

Mark.


    


--
_______________________________________________
LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug
%LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/

The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------


  
_______________________________________________
LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug
%LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/

The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including 
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------

Reply via email to