On 9/9/11 1:34 PM, TMK wrote:
On Sep 9, 2011 10:28 PM, TMK eng...@gmail.com
mailto:eng...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09.09.11 19:31, TMK wrote: We have find the reason why our
network analyzer report that bind is responding to a.root-server.net
in 30 sec.
You may have noticed this already,
On Sep 15, 2011, at 12:04 PM, Michael McNally wrote:
On 9/9/11 1:34 PM, TMK wrote:
On Sep 9, 2011 10:28 PM, TMK eng...@gmail.com
mailto:eng...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09.09.11 19:31, TMK wrote: We have find the reason why our
network analyzer report that bind is responding to
On 09.09.11 19:31, TMK wrote: We have find the reason why our
network analyzer report that bind is responding to a.root-server.net
in 30 sec.
Oh, does gmail rewrap lines in incoming messages? In the same stupid
way as Outlook does? Can you please turn it off?
does your server respond to
...@yahoo.com
Date: Aug 31, 2011 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: slow non-cached quries
To: TMK eng...@gmail.com
;; Received 738 bytes from 192.112.36.4#53(G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET) in
3133
ms
That pretty much is your delay. Look to your intermediate network
segments, especially any smart
On 09.09.11 19:31, TMK wrote:
We have find the reason why our network analyzer report that bind is
responding to a.root-server.net in 30 sec.
does your server respond to a.root-servers.net, or does
a.root-servers.net respond to your BIND?
Cause all the packets are having the same source
On Sep 9, 2011 10:28 PM, TMK eng...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09.09.11 19:31, TMK wrote: We have find the reason why our network
analyzer report that bind is responding to a.root-server.net in 30 sec.
does your server respond to a.root-servers.net, or does
a.root-servers.netrespond to your BIND?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:13 PM, TMK eng...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 2:06 PM, TMK eng...@gmail.com wrote:
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 10:05:42 +0200
From: TMK eng...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: slow non-cached quries
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Message-ID
On Sep 2, 2011 9:48 AM, TMK eng...@gmail.com wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Leonard Mills l...@yahoo.com
Date: Aug 31, 2011 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: slow non-cached quries
To: TMK eng...@gmail.com
;; Received 738 bytes from 192.112.36.4#53(G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET) in 3133 ms
From: Leonard Mills l...@yahoo.com
Date: Aug 31, 2011 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: slow non-cached quries
To: TMK eng...@gmail.com
;; Received 738 bytes from 192.112.36.4#53(G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET) in 3133 ms
That pretty much is your delay. Look to your intermediate network
segments, especially any smart
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 9:26 AM, TMK eng...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
In message
CAAKgOtgoifGPNEpHtX7++w=cze1dpxx2degq1ppkz18dpuf...@mail.gmail.com,
TMK writes:
Dears,
Probably this the thousand time you get these question. but
Tamer Mohamed
NOC engineer
LinkdotNet
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
In message
CAAKgOtgoifGPNEpHtX7++w=cze1dpxx2degq1ppkz18dpuf...@mail.gmail.com,
TMK writes:
Dears,
Probably this the thousand time you get these question. but our bind server
have
Dears,
Probably this the thousand time you get these question. but our bind server
have slow response time for the non-cached entries.
I have run dig with +trace option and below is the result
; DiG 9.8.0-P2 @127.0.0.1 www.google.com +trace
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
. 2013 IN
In message CAAKgOtgoifGPNEpHtX7++w=cze1dpxx2degq1ppkz18dpuf...@mail.gmail.com,
TMK writes:
Dears,
Probably this the thousand time you get these question. but our bind server
have slow response time for the non-cached entries.
I have run dig with +trace option and below is the result
;
13 matches
Mail list logo
