Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-20 Thread Vinny Abello


On Jan 20, 2013, at 12:23 AM, Keith Medcalf kmedc...@dessus.com wrote:

 
 Just an FYI...
 
 Every version of Windows since Windows 2000 (sans Windows Me) has had
 the DNS Client service which maintained this caching function. This was
 by design due to the massive dependency on DNS resolution which Active
 Directory has had since its creation. It greatly reduced the amount of
 repetitive lookups required thereby speeding up AD based functions and
 lessening the load on DNS servers. It still exists today up through
 Windows 8. You can disable the service, but it will also break DDNS
 updates unless your DHCP server registers hostnames on behalf of your
 clients.
 
 - -Vinny
 
 DDNS updates (including WINS registrations), static updates, and Active 
 Directory registrations are handled by the DHCPClient service since Windows 
 95 through all versions of client and server since.  The DNSClient handles 
 caching (in a method somewhat akin a very broken caching-only nameserver) 
 only.  You can disable the DNSClient service with no ill effect at all 
 (actually, it will probably improve things significantly, if you have a local 
 non-Windows caching recursive DNS to use).  You cannot disable the DHCPClient 
 service, however, without breaking DDNS updates, static configuration, and 
 Active Directory.
 

You know, that's how I remembered it too, but I went to verify that before I 
posted and found different information so I thought I remembered wrong. Since 
you've affirmed my first instinct I'll retract what I said about DDNS and 
concur with your statement.

DDNS in Windows didn't exist before Windows 2000 (as AD also didn't), and Win9x 
operating systems didn't have services as I recall it, though. Admittedly, I 
thankfully haven't used a Win9x OS in a very long time.

-Vinny


 ---
 ()  ascii ribbon campaign against html e-mail
 /\  www.asciiribbon.org
 
 
 
 



RE: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-19 Thread Keith Medcalf

 Just an FYI...

 Every version of Windows since Windows 2000 (sans Windows Me) has had
 the DNS Client service which maintained this caching function. This was
 by design due to the massive dependency on DNS resolution which Active
 Directory has had since its creation. It greatly reduced the amount of
 repetitive lookups required thereby speeding up AD based functions and
 lessening the load on DNS servers. It still exists today up through
 Windows 8. You can disable the service, but it will also break DDNS
 updates unless your DHCP server registers hostnames on behalf of your
 clients.

 - -Vinny

DDNS updates (including WINS registrations), static updates, and Active 
Directory registrations are handled by the DHCPClient service since Windows 95 
through all versions of client and server since.  The DNSClient handles caching 
(in a method somewhat akin a very broken caching-only nameserver) only.  You 
can disable the DNSClient service with no ill effect at all (actually, it will 
probably improve things significantly, if you have a local non-Windows caching 
recursive DNS to use).  You cannot disable the DHCPClient service, however, 
without breaking DDNS updates, static configuration, and Active Directory.

---
()  ascii ribbon campaign against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org







Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-18 Thread Vinny Abello
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 1/16/2013 7:16 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:


Just an FYI...

Every version of Windows since Windows 2000 (sans Windows Me) has had the DNS 
Client service which maintained this caching function. This was by design due 
to the massive dependency on DNS resolution which Active Directory has had 
since its creation. It greatly reduced the amount of repetitive lookups 
required thereby speeding up AD based functions and lessening the load on DNS 
servers. It still exists today up through Windows 8. You can disable the 
service, but it will also break DDNS updates unless your DHCP server registers 
hostnames on behalf of your clients.

- -Vinny

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)

iEYEARECAAYFAlD5z4wACgkQUyX7ywEAl3ojggCfb/ad2MZ9wp31M3g9zM89mHUo
ODcAnjbgTCNV4Qr2fX8thhsj5jXIOiCu
=xN4+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-18 Thread Vinny Abello
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 1/16/2013 7:16 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
 - Original Message -
 From: Erik Levinson erik.levin...@uberflip.com
 
 I'm having an unusual DNS problem and would appreciate feedback.

 For the zones in question, primary DNS is provided by GoDaddy and
 secondary DNS by DNS Made Easy. Over a week ago we made changes to
 several A records (including wildcards on two different zones), all
 already having a TTL no greater than one hour.

 The new IPs on those A records have taken many millions of requests
 since the changes. Occasionally, a small amount of traffic appears at
 the old IPs that those A records had. This is HTTP traffic. Packet
 captures of this traffic show various Host headers.
 
 I'm a touch surprised to find that no one has mentioned the facet of
 Windows OSs that requires ipconfig /flushdns in some such circumstances...
 
 Not only may *browsers* be caching DNS lookups without regard to TTLs,
 the *OS* might be doing it to you too, in circumstances I was never quite
 able to get a handle on.
 
 XP was known to do this, as late as SP3; I'm not sure about V or 7.

Just an FYI...

Every version of Windows since Windows 2000 (sans Windows Me) has had the DNS 
Client service which maintained this caching function. This was by design due 
to the massive dependency on DNS resolution which Active Directory has had 
since its creation. It greatly reduced the amount of repetitive lookups 
required thereby speeding up AD based functions and lessening the load on DNS 
servers. It still exists today up through Windows 8. You can disable the 
service, but it will also break DDNS updates unless your DHCP server registers 
hostnames on behalf of your clients.

- -Vinny

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)

iEYEARECAAYFAlD5z5QACgkQUyX7ywEAl3q4BACgtzaKz1U2+kWn9ExJoQaNy7+s
+mIAoLUjActGoFIKNUqzDDpdx14p/X/x
=4qXs
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-18 Thread Jay Ashworth
- Original Message -
 From: Vinny Abello vi...@abellohome.net

 Just an FYI...
 
 Every version of Windows since Windows 2000 (sans Windows Me) has had
 the DNS Client service which maintained this caching function. This
 was by design due to the massive dependency on DNS resolution which
 Active Directory has had since its creation. It greatly reduced the
 amount of repetitive lookups required thereby speeding up AD based
 functions and lessening the load on DNS servers. It still exists today
 up through Windows 8. You can disable the service, but it will also
 break DDNS updates unless your DHCP server registers hostnames on
 behalf of your clients.

Microsoft broke the Internet just to make their internal networking
work properly?

I'm shocked; *shocked* I tell... yes, just put the money right over there;
*shocked* I say.

You can't imagine how much time that lost me in diagnoses when it first
came out, until we finally located it somewhere on the Internet.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
Ashworth  Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA   #natog  +1 727 647 1274



Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-18 Thread Vinny Abello
On 1/18/2013 5:46 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
 - Original Message -
 From: Vinny Abello vi...@abellohome.net
 
 Just an FYI...

 Every version of Windows since Windows 2000 (sans Windows Me) has had
 the DNS Client service which maintained this caching function. This
 was by design due to the massive dependency on DNS resolution which
 Active Directory has had since its creation. It greatly reduced the
 amount of repetitive lookups required thereby speeding up AD based
 functions and lessening the load on DNS servers. It still exists today
 up through Windows 8. You can disable the service, but it will also
 break DDNS updates unless your DHCP server registers hostnames on
 behalf of your clients.
 
 Microsoft broke the Internet just to make their internal networking
 work properly?
 
 I'm shocked; *shocked* I tell... yes, just put the money right over there;
 *shocked* I say.
 
 You can't imagine how much time that lost me in diagnoses when it first
 came out, until we finally located it somewhere on the Internet.

LOL... I don't know that they so much broke anything other than people's sanity 
and expectations. I can't say this with certainty, but I was always under the 
assumption that the DNS Client also respected TTL's of all RR's it cached. 
Maybe that was an incorrect assumption, but if that was correct then at most 
all they did was give everyone a caching stub resolver built into their OS. I 
don't feel this is much different than many *nix distributions installing BIND 
with a default recursive configuration and /etc/resolv.conf pointing to ::1 or 
127.0.0.1... other than the obvious differences that it's doing recursion and 
you can *ASK* BIND what it's doing in a myriad of ways. That's always been my 
biggest gripe with the DNS Client. Either way, I wonder what the load on 
various DNS infrastructure throughout the world would look like if this 
mechanism didn't exist. I take it most recursive servers would just be 
answering a lot more queries from cache and burning cycles.

For the record, Mac OS X also caches DNS queries. You can flush with the cache 
with dscacheutil -flushcache up through Snow Leopard, or using killall -HUP 
mDNSResponder via sudo or equivalent root rights on Lion and Mountain Lion.

-Vinny




Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-18 Thread Andrei Ivanov
Jay Ashworth wrote:

Microsoft broke the Internet just to make their internal networking
work properly?

I'm shocked; *shocked* I tell... yes, just put the money right over there;
*shocked* I say.

You can't imagine how much time that lost me in diagnoses when it first
came out, until we finally located it somewhere on the Internet.


Yeah, SUNW did it even before MSFT. Ever heard about 'nscd'?!
It gets installed [but disabled by default] in any Linux distro derived
from Red Hat Linux as well. If activated, will keep resolved records
in an in-memory cache for an hour with all default settings.

-- 

andrei




Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-17 Thread Damian Menscher
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Erik Levinson
erik.levin...@uberflip.comwrote:

 To give an idea of the scale of the problem right now, I'm getting
 thousands of requests per minute to a new IP vs. about two requests per
 minute on the equivalent old IP, with over 60% of the latter being Baidu,
 but also a bit of Googlebot and other random bot and non-bot UAs.


It's common for malware to spoof the Googlebot user-agent since they know
most webmasters won't block it.  You might want to check whether the IPs
you're seeing it from are really allocated to us -- if so, I'd be
interested in tracking down why we're crawling your old IP.

Damian


Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-17 Thread Erik Levinson
Thanks Damian. I see four requests with Google UAs from actual Google IPs, 
66.249.73.45 and 66.249.73.17 (PTR and rwhois seem yours for both), in a period 
of 30 minutes (compared to over 80 per minute on the new IPs). This is pretty 
low, so I'm not too worried. 

Baidu is the main culprit now; there's little other traffic. In fact, we're 
getting no traffic from Baidu on the new IPs, only to the old ones. I've 
already e-mailed their spider help e-mail, but it's fallen on deaf ears.

Erik

-Original Message-
From: Damian Menscher dam...@google.com
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 1:58pm
To: Erik Levinson erik.levin...@uberflip.com
Cc: NANOG mailing list nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Erik Levinson
erik.levin...@uberflip.comwrote:

 To give an idea of the scale of the problem right now, I'm getting
 thousands of requests per minute to a new IP vs. about two requests per
 minute on the equivalent old IP, with over 60% of the latter being Baidu,
 but also a bit of Googlebot and other random bot and non-bot UAs.


It's common for malware to spoof the Googlebot user-agent since they know
most webmasters won't block it.  You might want to check whether the IPs
you're seeing it from are really allocated to us -- if so, I'd be
interested in tracking down why we're crawling your old IP.

Damian





Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-17 Thread Erik Levinson
Upon further investigation, in this particular Google case, it seems to be a 
customer's CNAME to a record of theirs which is an actual A record to our old 
IP, contrary to our instructions (we tell everyone to CNAME us, so we can 
change IPs as we wish, which we've done for the first time this year). So there 
is no Google problem.

-Original Message-
From: Erik Levinson erik.levin...@uberflip.com
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 8:42pm
To: Damian Menscher dam...@google.com
Cc: NANOG mailing list nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

Thanks Damian. I see four requests with Google UAs from actual Google IPs, 
66.249.73.45 and 66.249.73.17 (PTR and rwhois seem yours for both), in a period 
of 30 minutes (compared to over 80 per minute on the new IPs). This is pretty 
low, so I'm not too worried. 

Baidu is the main culprit now; there's little other traffic. In fact, we're 
getting no traffic from Baidu on the new IPs, only to the old ones. I've 
already e-mailed their spider help e-mail, but it's fallen on deaf ears.

Erik

-Original Message-
From: Damian Menscher dam...@google.com
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 1:58pm
To: Erik Levinson erik.levin...@uberflip.com
Cc: NANOG mailing list nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Erik Levinson
erik.levin...@uberflip.comwrote:

 To give an idea of the scale of the problem right now, I'm getting
 thousands of requests per minute to a new IP vs. about two requests per
 minute on the equivalent old IP, with over 60% of the latter being Baidu,
 but also a bit of Googlebot and other random bot and non-bot UAs.


It's common for malware to spoof the Googlebot user-agent since they know
most webmasters won't block it.  You might want to check whether the IPs
you're seeing it from are really allocated to us -- if so, I'd be
interested in tracking down why we're crawling your old IP.

Damian






Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread George Herbert
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Erik Levinson
erik.levin...@uberflip.com wrote:
 Hi everyone,

 I'm having an unusual DNS problem and would appreciate feedback.

 For the zones in question, primary DNS is provided by GoDaddy and
 secondary DNS by DNS Made Easy. Over a week ago we made changes to
 several A records (including wildcards on two different zones), all
 already having a TTL no greater than one hour.

 The new IPs on those A records have taken many millions of requests
 since the changes. Occasionally, a small amount of traffic appears at
 the old IPs that those A records had. This is HTTP traffic. Packet
 captures of this traffic show various Host headers.

 Attempting to resolve those various Host headers from various networks
 in Canada against various random private and public resolvers and
 against the authoritative NSs all yield correct results (i.e. new IPs).

 However, both GoDaddy and DNS Made Easy use anycast, which makes it less
 likely that I can see the entire picture of what's happening.

 I suspect that somewhere, one of their servers has the wrong data, or
 some resolver is misbehaving, but based on the
 pattern/traffic/volume/randomization of hostnames, the resolver theory is
 less likely. I haven't analyzed the source IPs yet to see if they're in a
 particular set of countries.

 I've opened a ticket with DNS Made Easy and they replied very quickly
 suggesting the problem is not with them. I've opened a ticket with
 GoDaddy and...well, it's GoDaddy, so I don't expect much (no response yet).

 Any ideas? Can folks try resolving eriktest.uberflip.com and post
 here with details only if it resolves to an IP starting with 76.9 (old IPs)?


 Thanks

 Erik


The other likely cause of this is local cacheing nameservers somewhere
at some ISP or major site, that do not respect TTL values for some
reason.

This is sadly a common problem - not statistically, most nameservers
do the right thing, but if you run big sites and flip things, there's
always a long tail of people whose nameservers just didn't get it.



-- 
-george william herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com



Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Erik Levinson
erik.levin...@uberflip.com wrote:
 Any ideas? Can folks try resolving eriktest.uberflip.com and post
 here with details only if it resolves to an IP starting with 76.9 (old IPs)?



 for d in $(seq 1 1000); do dig @pdns01.domaincontrol.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst ; dig @pdns02.domaincontrol.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst ; dig @ns5.dnsmadeeasy.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst ; dig @ns6.dnsmadeeasy.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst; dig @ns7.dnsmadeeasy.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst ; done

you tried something like this already I assume?



Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread RijilV
Also client programs don't always honor TTLs either.  For example, JAVA
defaults to ignoring TTLs and holding IPs forever.

*networkaddress.cache.ttl (default: -1)*
Indicates the caching policy for successful name lookups from the name
service. The value is specified as as integer to indicate the number of
seconds to cache the successful lookup. A value of -1 indicates cache
forever.

Depending on who your clients are, your milage may vary.

.r'


On 16 January 2013 14:13, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Erik Levinson
 erik.levin...@uberflip.com wrote:
  Hi everyone,
 
  I'm having an unusual DNS problem and would appreciate feedback.
 
  For the zones in question, primary DNS is provided by GoDaddy and
  secondary DNS by DNS Made Easy. Over a week ago we made changes to
  several A records (including wildcards on two different zones), all
  already having a TTL no greater than one hour.
 
  The new IPs on those A records have taken many millions of requests
  since the changes. Occasionally, a small amount of traffic appears at
  the old IPs that those A records had. This is HTTP traffic. Packet
  captures of this traffic show various Host headers.
 
  Attempting to resolve those various Host headers from various networks
  in Canada against various random private and public resolvers and
  against the authoritative NSs all yield correct results (i.e. new IPs).
 
  However, both GoDaddy and DNS Made Easy use anycast, which makes it less
  likely that I can see the entire picture of what's happening.
 
  I suspect that somewhere, one of their servers has the wrong data, or
  some resolver is misbehaving, but based on the
  pattern/traffic/volume/randomization of hostnames, the resolver theory is
  less likely. I haven't analyzed the source IPs yet to see if they're in a
  particular set of countries.
 
  I've opened a ticket with DNS Made Easy and they replied very quickly
  suggesting the problem is not with them. I've opened a ticket with
  GoDaddy and...well, it's GoDaddy, so I don't expect much (no response
 yet).
 
  Any ideas? Can folks try resolving eriktest.uberflip.com and post
  here with details only if it resolves to an IP starting with 76.9 (old
 IPs)?
 
 
  Thanks
 
  Erik


 The other likely cause of this is local cacheing nameservers somewhere
 at some ISP or major site, that do not respect TTL values for some
 reason.

 This is sadly a common problem - not statistically, most nameservers
 do the right thing, but if you run big sites and flip things, there's
 always a long tail of people whose nameservers just didn't get it.



 --
 -george william herbert
 george.herb...@gmail.com




Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Christopher Morrow
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Erik Levinson
erik.levin...@uberflip.com wrote:
 Yes, though I tried way less than 1000 in the loop.


:)

given a large list of recursives you could even test resolution
through a bunch of recursive servers...



Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Erik Levinson

Yes, though I tried way less than 1000 in the loop.

On 16/01/13 05:13 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Erik Levinson
erik.levin...@uberflip.com  wrote:

Any ideas? Can folks try resolving eriktest.uberflip.com and post
here with details only if it resolves to an IP starting with 76.9 (old IPs)?




  for d in $(seq 1 1000); do dig @pdns01.domaincontrol.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst ; dig @pdns02.domaincontrol.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst ; dig @ns5.dnsmadeeasy.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst ; dig @ns6.dnsmadeeasy.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst; dig @ns7.dnsmadeeasy.com.
eriktest.uberflip.com  /tmp/tst ; done

you tried something like this already I assume?






Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Erik Levinson

Good point.

While I haven't checked the distribution of source IPs yet, I briefly 
grepped for the User-Agent headers in the tcpdump output, and there's a 
higher than expected bot presence, particularly Baidu.


That said, there are also normal UAs (whatever that means, with every 
device/software pretending to be something else these days).


On 16/01/13 05:20 PM, RijilV wrote:

Also client programs don't always honor TTLs either.  For example, JAVA
defaults to ignoring TTLs and holding IPs forever.

*networkaddress.cache.ttl (default: -1)*
Indicates the caching policy for successful name lookups from the name
service. The value is specified as as integer to indicate the number of
seconds to cache the successful lookup. A value of -1 indicates cache
forever.

Depending on who your clients are, your milage may vary.

.r'






Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Erik Levinson
True...I did try 4.2.2.2 / 8.8.8.8 and some local ones here. All looked 
fine.


With anycast / DB and other backend clusters / load balancing / whatever 
else behind the scenes, it's hard to get a good idea of what's actually 
happening.


Might be stuck with running this infra for a while longer and seeing if 
the traffic disappears eventually.


On 16/01/13 05:25 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Erik Levinson
erik.levin...@uberflip.com  wrote:

Yes, though I tried way less than 1000 in the loop.



:)

given a large list of recursives you could even test resolution
through a bunch of recursive servers...




Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread William Herrin
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Erik Levinson
erik.levin...@uberflip.com wrote:
 I suspect that somewhere, one of their servers has the wrong data, or
 some resolver is misbehaving, but based on the
 pattern/traffic/volume/randomization of hostnames, the resolver theory is
 less likely. I haven't analyzed the source IPs yet to see if they're in a
 particular set of countries.

Hi Erik,

Look up DNS pinning. I can't rule out the possibility of a faulty
DNS server but it's far more likely your customers' web browsers are
simply ignoring the DNS TTL. Malfunctioning as designed. If you keep
it live, you'll notice a falling trickle of traffic to the old address
for the next year or so.

Regards,
Bill Herrin

-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004



Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Jean-Francois Mezei
Consider the possibility that some end users (or even corp networks) may
have hardcoded your hosts' translation into their hosts files or perhaps
corporate proxy firewalls that allow access onto to whitelisted web sites.

They will continue to point to the old IP addresses until you shutdown
the service and they call you to inquire why *you* broke your system :-)

If this HTTP service has a GUI (aka: web page versus credit card
transactions), you should put up a warning on the web page whenever it
is being accessed via the old IP address.



Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Jay Ashworth
- Original Message -
 From: Erik Levinson erik.levin...@uberflip.com

 I'm having an unusual DNS problem and would appreciate feedback.
 
 For the zones in question, primary DNS is provided by GoDaddy and
 secondary DNS by DNS Made Easy. Over a week ago we made changes to
 several A records (including wildcards on two different zones), all
 already having a TTL no greater than one hour.
 
 The new IPs on those A records have taken many millions of requests
 since the changes. Occasionally, a small amount of traffic appears at
 the old IPs that those A records had. This is HTTP traffic. Packet
 captures of this traffic show various Host headers.

I'm a touch surprised to find that no one has mentioned the facet of
Windows OSs that requires ipconfig /flushdns in some such circumstances...

Not only may *browsers* be caching DNS lookups without regard to TTLs,
the *OS* might be doing it to you too, in circumstances I was never quite
able to get a handle on.

XP was known to do this, as late as SP3; I'm not sure about V or 7.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
Ashworth  Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA   #natog  +1 727 647 1274



Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Robert Bonomi
 From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi@nanog.org  Wed Jan 16 18:21:21 
 2013
 Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 19:16:57 -0500 (EST)
 From: Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com
 To: NANOG nanog@nanog.org
 Subject: Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

 I'm a touch surprised to find that no one has mentioned the facet of 
 Windows OSs that requires ipconfig /flushdns in some such 
 circumstances...

Winbloze has to be rebooted frequently enough that this is rarely an issue.
wry grin






Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Joe Abley

On 2013-01-16, at 14:33, Erik Levinson erik.levin...@uberflip.com wrote:

 True...I did try 4.2.2.2 / 8.8.8.8 and some local ones here. All looked fine.

I sent queries from 270+ different locations for the domains you mentioned 
off-list and I didn't see any inconsistencies. The persistent 
host-caching/browser-caching theories seem like your best bet (or my 270+ 
locations weren't sufficiently diverse to catch a stale zone being served by an 
anycast authority server).


Joe




Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?

2013-01-16 Thread Erik Levinson
Thanks Joe and thanks everyone else for the on and off-list replies. Quite 
insightful.

I think we've reached the consensus that the problem is the ignoring of TTLs as 
opposed to misbehaving/stale authoritative servers. So for now I shall wait.

To give an idea of the scale of the problem right now, I'm getting thousands of 
requests per minute to a new IP vs. about two requests per minute on the 
equivalent old IP, with over 60% of the latter being Baidu, but also a bit of 
Googlebot and other random bot and non-bot UAs. 

Perhaps next week I'll unbind some old IPs for a few minutes to see what 
happens.

-Original Message-
From: Joe Abley jab...@hopcount.ca
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 8:57pm
To: Erik Levinson erik.levin...@uberflip.com
Cc: Christopher Morrow morrowc.li...@gmail.com, nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Intermittent incorrect DNS resolution?


On 2013-01-16, at 14:33, Erik Levinson erik.levin...@uberflip.com wrote:

 True...I did try 4.2.2.2 / 8.8.8.8 and some local ones here. All looked fine.

I sent queries from 270+ different locations for the domains you mentioned 
off-list and I didn't see any inconsistencies. The persistent 
host-caching/browser-caching theories seem like your best bet (or my 270+ 
locations weren't sufficiently diverse to catch a stale zone being served by an 
anycast authority server).


Joe