Re: servfail are not cached!
Thanks. 2011/9/27 Jan-Piet Mens > On Tue Sep 27 2011 at 17:32:22 CEST, Issam Harrathi wrote: > > > and you say here it's cached for 30 seconds?! > > Evan said: > > > and we've discussed implementing it in BIND9, but haven't had time yet. > > In other words, they are *not* cached in BIND9. > >-JP > ___ > 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 > ___ 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
Re: servfail are not cached!
On Tue Sep 27 2011 at 17:32:22 CEST, Issam Harrathi wrote: > and you say here it's cached for 30 seconds?! Evan said: > and we've discussed implementing it in BIND9, but haven't had time yet. In other words, they are *not* cached in BIND9. -JP ___ 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
Re: servfail are not cached!
Actually he said the DNS protocol allows for it and ISC had been considering adding it. -Ben Croswell On Sep 27, 2011 11:38 AM, "Issam Harrathi" wrote: > As i test it's not cached at all, and you say here it's cached for 30 > seconds?! > i'm using 9.7.2-P3. > > 2011/9/27 Evan Hunt > >> > I discover that servfail are not cached. is it normal? >> >> Yes, that's normal. >> >> Temporary negative caching of SERVFAIL responses for a limited period (up >> to 30 seconds, if I recall correctly) is permitted by the DNS protocol, >> and we've discussed implementing it in BIND9, but haven't had time yet. >> >> -- >> Evan Hunt -- e...@isc.org >> Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. >> ___ 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
Re: servfail are not cached!
As i test it's not cached at all, and you say here it's cached for 30 seconds?! i'm using 9.7.2-P3. 2011/9/27 Evan Hunt > > I discover that servfail are not cached. is it normal? > > Yes, that's normal. > > Temporary negative caching of SERVFAIL responses for a limited period (up > to 30 seconds, if I recall correctly) is permitted by the DNS protocol, > and we've discussed implementing it in BIND9, but haven't had time yet. > > -- > Evan Hunt -- e...@isc.org > Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. > ___ 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
Re: servfail are not cached!
> I discover that servfail are not cached. is it normal? Yes, that's normal. Temporary negative caching of SERVFAIL responses for a limited period (up to 30 seconds, if I recall correctly) is permitted by the DNS protocol, and we've discussed implementing it in BIND9, but haven't had time yet. -- Evan Hunt -- e...@isc.org Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ___ 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
servfail are not cached!
I discover that servfail are not cached. is it normal? explanation: I have a cache-recursing server and i try www.blabla.com (which exist) and then i stop the dns server of www.blabla.com. Then (after ttl expired) from my cache-recusing server i try dig @0 www.blabla.com and i receive a servfail, all this is OK. But this result is not cached means each time i do my dig my server will try to contact the dns server of blabla.com. Thanks; Issam Harrathi. ___ 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
