RE: Seeking Advice on DNSSEC Algorithm Rollover

2012-06-25 Thread Tony Finch
Spain, Dr. Jeffry A. spa...@countryday.net wrote:

 My experience with changing the timing metadata or removing the key
 files is that named issues a warning like the following: zone zone/IN:
 Key zone/algorithm/key tag missing or inactive and has no
 replacement: retaining signatures. In this circumstance none of the
 RRSIGs or NSECs are removed. They sit there indefinitely even after the
 RRSIGs expire.

If I remember correctly, that was because you removed the keyfile rather
than just updating the timing metadata. Try updating the timing data and
leaving the keyfiles in place until after BIND has acted on the deletion
date.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  d...@dotat.at  http://dotat.at/
Forties: Northwesterly 4 or 5, occasionally 6 in east. Slight or moderate,
occasionally rough later. Mainly fair. Moderate or good.
___
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: Seeking Advice on DNSSEC Algorithm Rollover

2012-06-25 Thread Spain, Dr. Jeffry A.
 My experience with changing the timing metadata or removing the key 
 files is that named issues a warning like the following: zone zone/IN:
 Key zone/algorithm/key tag missing or inactive and has no
 replacement: retaining signatures. In this circumstance none of the 
 RRSIGs or NSECs are removed. They sit there indefinitely even after 
 the RRSIGs expire.

 If I remember correctly, that was because you removed the keyfile rather than 
 just updating the timing metadata. Try updating the timing data and leaving 
 the keyfiles in place until after BIND has acted on the deletion date.

I did some additional testing over the weekend. Removing the key files without 
updating the timing metadata definitely causes this problem. Updating the 
timing metadata such that the inactive date is in the past and the deletion 
date is in the future also causes this problem. The key to success appears to 
be updating the timing metadata such that the inactive and deletion dates are 
both in the past. I still want to test this where there are no keys present for 
a second algorithm, i.e. a secure to insecure transition. Thanks. Jeff.
___
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: Understanding cause of DNS format error (FORMERR)

2012-06-25 Thread Tony Finch
It looks to me like this is an EDNS bug. I am querying the authoritative
server directly, with no firewalls in the way. The FORMERR is coming from
the authoritative server not from BIND. I get the same result over IPv4
and IPv6.

They also have a bug in their NXDOMAIN logic: extranet.microsoft.com
does not exist therefore partners.extranet.microsoft.com cannot exist.


;  DiG 9.9.1-P1  +noedns @ns1.msft.net. partners.extranet.microsoft.com 
ns
; (2 servers found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 9931
;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 4, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 4
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;partners.extranet.microsoft.com. INNS

;; ANSWER SECTION:
partners.extranet.microsoft.com. 3600 IN NS dns12.one.microsoft.com.
partners.extranet.microsoft.com. 3600 IN NS dns10.one.microsoft.com.
partners.extranet.microsoft.com. 3600 IN NS dns13.one.microsoft.com.
partners.extranet.microsoft.com. 3600 IN NS dns11.one.microsoft.com.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
dns12.one.microsoft.com. 3600   IN  A   207.46.55.10
dns10.one.microsoft.com. 3600   IN  A   131.107.125.65
dns13.one.microsoft.com. 3600   IN  A   65.55.31.17
dns11.one.microsoft.com. 3600   IN  A   94.245.124.49

;; Query time: 159 msec
;; SERVER: 2a01:111:2005::1:1#53(2a01:111:2005::1:1)
;; WHEN: Mon Jun 25 12:38:51 2012
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 197


;  DiG 9.9.1-P1  +edns=0 @ns1.msft.net. partners.extranet.microsoft.com 
ns
; (2 servers found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: FORMERR, id: 20875
;; flags: qr rd ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;partners.extranet.microsoft.com. INNS

;; Query time: 142 msec
;; SERVER: 2a01:111:2005::1:1#53(2a01:111:2005::1:1)
;; WHEN: Mon Jun 25 12:38:57 2012
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 60


;  DiG 9.9.1-P1  +noedns @ns1.msft.net extranet.microsoft.com ns
; (2 servers found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 141
;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;extranet.microsoft.com.IN  NS

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
microsoft.com.  3600IN  SOA ns1.msft.net.
msnhst.microsoft.com. 2012062205 300 600 2419200 3600

;; Query time: 142 msec
;; SERVER: 2a01:111:2005::1:1#53(2a01:111:2005::1:1)
;; WHEN: Mon Jun 25 12:44:44 2012
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 95


Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  d...@dotat.at  http://dotat.at/
Sole, Lundy, Fastnet: Southeast at first in Lundy and Fastnet, otherwise
southwest, 4 or 5. Slight or moderate, occasionally rough in west Sole.
Occasional rain or drizzle, fog patches. Moderate, occasionally very poor.
___
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: Understanding cause of DNS format error (FORMERR)

2012-06-25 Thread Tony Finch
Carsten Strotmann (private) c...@strotmann.de wrote:

 The FORMERR I'm seeing is also quite odd, as it has the AD flag set,
 which should normally not appear in an error type of response, but
 might be caused by a mangled DNS packet:

I think it is echoing the AD bit in the query.


;  DiG 9.9.1-P1  +noad +qr @ns1.msft.net. 
partners.extranet.microsoft.com ns
; (2 servers found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Sending:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 3331
;; flags: rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;partners.extranet.microsoft.com. INNS

;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: FORMERR, id: 3331
;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;partners.extranet.microsoft.com. INNS

;; Query time: 142 msec
;; SERVER: 2a01:111:2005::1:1#53(2a01:111:2005::1:1)
;; WHEN: Mon Jun 25 12:57:06 2012
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 60


;  DiG 9.9.1-P1  +qr @ns1.msft.net. partners.extranet.microsoft.com ns
; (2 servers found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Sending:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 21060
;; flags: rd ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;partners.extranet.microsoft.com. INNS

;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: FORMERR, id: 21060
;; flags: qr rd ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;partners.extranet.microsoft.com. INNS

;; Query time: 142 msec
;; SERVER: 2a01:111:2005::1:1#53(2a01:111:2005::1:1)
;; WHEN: Mon Jun 25 12:56:22 2012
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 60


Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  d...@dotat.at  http://dotat.at/
Dogger: Northwest 5 or 6 becoming variable 3 or 4. Moderate, becoming slight
in west. Showers. Moderate or good.
___
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: Understanding cause of DNS format error (FORMERR)

2012-06-25 Thread Sam Wilson
In article mailman.1121.1340625284.63724.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
 Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote:

 It looks to me like this is an EDNS bug. ...

There's some kind of delegation bug as well.  If I query 
dns1[0-3].one.microsoft.com for SOA and NS for 
partners.extranet.microsoft.com you get sensible answers though the 
origin host is different for each server queried and those origins are 
privately addressed.

If I query dns1[0-3].one.microsoft.com for 
vlasext.partners.extranet.microsoft.com/IN/A I get answers with no AA 
bit set and a decreasing TTL as if the data were cached.  It does not 
appear that vlasext.partners.extranet.microsoft.com is delegated itself 
so it's not cached answers from a child zone.  The authority for 
zero-answer responses such as 
vlasext.partners.extranet.microsoft.com/IN/ is the SOA for 
partners.extranet.microsoft.com

It's all rather horrible.

Sam

-- 
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
___
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


Reverse zones best practices

2012-06-25 Thread nex6


Hi all,

look for some info on best practices for reverse zones. I have, a pretty big IP 
space and alot of reverse zones are not created.
I want to clean it up, a few people that dont really know DNS are thinking of 
super netting eg a top level 10.0.0.0/16 sorta thing. 

but we have 100s of defined mission critical reverse zones defined at the vlan 
level of 10.x.x.0/24...  my thinking, would be do a
discovery and create all the /24s, even if there is like 100s. instead of the 
bigger super net...


what would be the best practice and the way to go?



-Nex6

___
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


CNAME Rules

2012-06-25 Thread Srinivas Krishnan
The RFC rules on CNAMEs is fairly tight but I am seeing an increasing
amount of traffic with misconfigured CNAMEs some of which are accepted
by BIND as valid responses. The examples capture three trends, note
these are actual responses:

1) Example-1: CNAME in the additional section necessary to finish
processing of response. BIND accepts this as valid:

proto: DNS: id=febd qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=7
nscount=6 arcount=7
query: after12.failblog.org. A IN
answer: after12.failblog.org. CNAME IN TTL=3600 chzallnighter.wordpress.com.
answer: vip-lb.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=300 72.233.104.123
nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns1.wordpress.com.
nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns2.wordpress.com.
additional: chzallnighter.wordpress.com. CNAME IN TTL=300
vip-lb.wordpress.com.
additional: ns1.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 72.233.69.14
additional: ns2.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 76.74.159.137

2) Example-2: Multiple CNAMEs with same label but different data, BIND
finds this to be incorrect and retries if another nameserver is
available:


proto: DNS: id=8faa qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2 nscount=13
query: image.dhgate.com. A IN
answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.chinacache.net.
answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com.
nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 a.root-servers.net.
nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 b.root-servers.net.
nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 c.root-servers.net.

3) Example-3: Multiple CNAMEs with same and data, BIND finds this to
be incorrect as well and retries.

proto: DNS: id=a0f6 qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2
nscount=3 arcount=3
query: www.smilebox.com. A IN
answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns1.smilebox.com.
nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns2.smilebox.com.
nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns3.smilebox.com.
additional: ns1.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 207.66.132.8
additional: ns2.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 216.218.214.52
additional: ns3.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 71.164.20.101


My question really what are the rules governing CNAME processing in
BIND and why does Example-1 allowed as valid.


-srinivas
___
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: Reverse zones best practices

2012-06-25 Thread David Dowdle
I strongly recommend splitting on /8  /16 and /24 boundries. With the 
number of zones you are talking about, doing anything else will get very 
confusing very quickly.


If a netblock is larger than a /24, put at the top and bottom of each /24 
a comment lile explaining what size it is


For example my 10.in-addr.arpa. zone has
; this is top of the 10/8 delegates to 10.*/16


zone file for 230.16.10.in-addr.arpa has comment 
; 10.16.230.0/23  vlan : Purpose-of-vlan-here 10.16.230.0-10.16.231.255   (512)



In this way, whoever looks at the zone, no matter how dns savvy they are, 
knows the size of the netblock




On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, nex6 wrote:




Hi all,

look for some info on best practices for reverse zones. I have, a pretty big IP 
space and alot of reverse zones are not created.
I want to clean it up, a few people that dont really know DNS are thinking of super 
netting eg a top level 10.0.0.0/16 sorta thing.

but we have 100s of defined mission critical reverse zones defined at the vlan 
level of 10.x.x.0/24...  my thinking, would be do a
discovery and create all the /24s, even if there is like 100s. instead of the 
bigger super net...


what would be the best practice and the way to go?



-Nex6

___
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: CNAME Rules

2012-06-25 Thread Chuck Swiger
On Jun 25, 2012, at 2:13 PM, Srinivas Krishnan wrote:
 The RFC rules on CNAMEs is fairly tight but I am seeing an increasing
 amount of traffic with misconfigured CNAMEs some of which are accepted
 by BIND as valid responses. The examples capture three trends, note
 these are actual responses:
 
 1) Example-1: CNAME in the additional section necessary to finish
 processing of response. BIND accepts this as valid:
 
 proto: DNS: id=febd qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=7
 nscount=6 arcount=7
query: after12.failblog.org. A IN
answer: after12.failblog.org. CNAME IN TTL=3600 
 chzallnighter.wordpress.com.
answer: vip-lb.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=300 72.233.104.123
nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns1.wordpress.com.
nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns2.wordpress.com.
additional: chzallnighter.wordpress.com. CNAME IN TTL=300
 vip-lb.wordpress.com.
additional: ns1.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 72.233.69.14
additional: ns2.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 76.74.159.137

This is standard CNAME chaining, per RFC-1034:

% dig after12.failblog.org @8.8.8.8
[ ... ]
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;after12.failblog.org.  IN  A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
after12.failblog.org.   3416IN  CNAME   chzallnighter.wordpress.com.
chzallnighter.wordpress.com. 116 IN CNAME   vip-lb.wordpress.com.
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   116 IN  A   74.200.247.187
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   116 IN  A   76.74.255.117
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   116 IN  A   76.74.255.123
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   116 IN  A   72.233.104.123
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   116 IN  A   72.233.127.217
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   116 IN  A   74.200.247.59

 2) Example-2: Multiple CNAMEs with same label but different data, BIND
 finds this to be incorrect and retries if another nameserver is
 available:
 
 
 proto: DNS: id=8faa qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2 nscount=13
query: image.dhgate.com. A IN
answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.chinacache.net.
answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com.
nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 a.root-servers.net.
nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 b.root-servers.net.
nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 c.root-servers.net.

% dig image.dhgate.com @8.8.8.8
[ ... ]
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;image.dhgate.com.  IN  A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
image.dhgate.com.   26  IN  CNAME   image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com.
image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com. 29  IN  CNAME   image.dhgate.com.wscdns.com.
image.dhgate.com.wscdns.com. 29 IN  CNAME   dhgate.com.edgesuite.net.
dhgate.com.edgesuite.net. 1381  IN  CNAME   a1015.b.akamai.net.
a1015.b.akamai.net. 20  IN  A   65.121.208.137
a1015.b.akamai.net. 20  IN  A   65.121.208.120

I wonder where chinacache.net came from in your case, unless they are using
different CDNs in different parts of the world.  Around here, they're using
Akamai EdgeSuite.

Again, this looks to be standard CNAME chaining, only your query didn't chase
image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com any further.

 3) Example-3: Multiple CNAMEs with same and data, BIND finds this to
 be incorrect as well and retries.
 
 proto: DNS: id=a0f6 qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2
 nscount=3 arcount=3
query: www.smilebox.com. A IN
answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns1.smilebox.com.
nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns2.smilebox.com.
nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns3.smilebox.com.
additional: ns1.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 207.66.132.8
additional: ns2.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 216.218.214.52
additional: ns3.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 71.164.20.101
 
 My question really what are the rules governing CNAME processing in
 BIND and why does Example-1 allowed as valid.

From here, this gets:

% dig www.smilebox.com @8.8.8.8
[ ... ]
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;www.smilebox.com.  IN  A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.smilebox.com.   3421IN  CNAME   www.g.smilebox.com.
www.g.smilebox.com. 121 IN  A   216.218.214.53

...which is a single CNAME pointing to an A record.  Are you sure your 
ancount=2
was really two copies of the same CNAME, rather than a CNAME and A record?

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck

___
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: Moving DNS out of non-cooperative provider

2012-06-25 Thread John Miller
We've just resolved this amicably--I'd missed the
commercial.service@rcn.comaddress, but was contacted off-list by one
of RCN's engineers, who read
this thread and has removed our domain from their nameservers.  He was
quite helpful.  No cease-and-desist letter needed--not by a long shot!

John



On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:


 In message 4fdf631a.4060...@brandeis.edu, John Miller writes:
  Hi Alexander,
 
  We've actually run into this before.  Once upon a time, RCN cable used
  to run some slave servers for us, but we've long since moved away from
  them, including zone transfers.  We yanked them from our registrar a
  long time ago, and life was good.  For whatever reason, RCN's still
  answering queries for brandeis.edu.
 
  As others have mentioned, change your DNS servers with your domain
  registrar, and you'll be fine.
 
  John

 And if there is another zone with a CNAME to a brandeis.edu domain
 on those servers the clients will be getting old data.  As you have
 no control over creation of CNAMEs in other zones I would suggest
 that you send them a Cease and Decist notice if they are still doing
 it.

 Mark
 --
 Mark Andrews, ISC
 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
 PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org




-- 
John Miller
Systems Engineer
Brandeis University
johnm...@brandeis.edu
(781) 736-4619
___
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: CNAME Rules

2012-06-25 Thread Srinivas Krishnan
Chuck,

You are using a caching resolver to check the responses and you only see 
response after its been resolved by Google's DNS server. Try dig 
@ns1.wordpress.com after12.failblog.org. to see the actual records that you 
would receive if you were a DNS server performing an authoritative query to 
wordpress.

Is having a CNAME in the additional section regular CNAME chaining, my 
understanding was that additional sections do not contain CNAMEs. 

-srinivas 

On Monday, June 25, 2012 5:29:24 PM UTC-4, Chuck Swiger wrote:
 On Jun 25, 2012, at 2:13 PM, Srinivas Krishnan wrote:
  The RFC rules on CNAMEs is fairly tight but I am seeing an increasing
  amount of traffic with misconfigured CNAMEs some of which are accepted
  by BIND as valid responses. The examples capture three trends, note
  these are actual responses:
  
  1) Example-1: CNAME in the additional section necessary to finish
  processing of response. BIND accepts this as valid:
  
  proto: DNS: id=febd qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=7
  nscount=6 arcount=7
 query: after12.failblog.org. A IN
 answer: after12.failblog.org. CNAME IN TTL=3600 
  chzallnighter.wordpress.com.
 answer: vip-lb.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=300 72.233.104.123
 nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns1.wordpress.com.
 nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns2.wordpress.com.
 additional: chzallnighter.wordpress.com. CNAME IN TTL=300
  vip-lb.wordpress.com.
 additional: ns1.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 72.233.69.14
 additional: ns2.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 76.74.159.137
 
 This is standard CNAME chaining, per RFC-1034:
 
 % dig after12.failblog.org @8.8.8.8
 [ ... ]
 ;; QUESTION SECTION:
 ;after12.failblog.org.IN  A
 
 ;; ANSWER SECTION:
 after12.failblog.org. 3416IN  CNAME   chzallnighter.wordpress.com.
 chzallnighter.wordpress.com. 116 IN   CNAME   vip-lb.wordpress.com.
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 116 IN  A   74.200.247.187
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 116 IN  A   76.74.255.117
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 116 IN  A   76.74.255.123
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 116 IN  A   72.233.104.123
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 116 IN  A   72.233.127.217
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 116 IN  A   74.200.247.59
 
  2) Example-2: Multiple CNAMEs with same label but different data, BIND
  finds this to be incorrect and retries if another nameserver is
  available:
  
  
  proto: DNS: id=8faa qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2 nscount=13
 query: image.dhgate.com. A IN
 answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.chinacache.net.
 answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com.
 nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 a.root-servers.net.
 nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 b.root-servers.net.
 nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 c.root-servers.net.
 
 % dig image.dhgate.com @8.8.8.8
 [ ... ]
 ;; QUESTION SECTION:
 ;image.dhgate.com.IN  A
 
 ;; ANSWER SECTION:
 image.dhgate.com. 26  IN  CNAME   image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com.
 image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com. 29IN  CNAME   
 image.dhgate.com.wscdns.com.
 image.dhgate.com.wscdns.com. 29   IN  CNAME   
 dhgate.com.edgesuite.net.
 dhgate.com.edgesuite.net. 1381IN  CNAME   a1015.b.akamai.net.
 a1015.b.akamai.net.   20  IN  A   65.121.208.137
 a1015.b.akamai.net.   20  IN  A   65.121.208.120
 
 I wonder where chinacache.net came from in your case, unless they are using
 different CDNs in different parts of the world.  Around here, they're using
 Akamai EdgeSuite.
 
 Again, this looks to be standard CNAME chaining, only your query didn't chase
 image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com any further.
 
  3) Example-3: Multiple CNAMEs with same and data, BIND finds this to
  be incorrect as well and retries.
  
  proto: DNS: id=a0f6 qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2
  nscount=3 arcount=3
 query: www.smilebox.com. A IN
 answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
 answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
 nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns1.smilebox.com.
 nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns2.smilebox.com.
 nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns3.smilebox.com.
 additional: ns1.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 207.66.132.8
 additional: ns2.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 216.218.214.52
 additional: ns3.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 71.164.20.101
  
  My question really what are the rules governing CNAME processing in
  BIND and why does Example-1 allowed as valid.
 
 From here, this gets:
 
 % dig www.smilebox.com @8.8.8.8
 [ ... ]
 ;; QUESTION SECTION:
 ;www.smilebox.com.IN  A
 
 ;; ANSWER SECTION:
 www.smilebox.com. 3421IN  CNAME   www.g.smilebox.com.
 www.g.smilebox.com.   121 IN  A   216.218.214.53
 
 ...which is a single CNAME pointing to an A record.  Are you sure your 
 ancount=2
 

RE: Reverse zones best practices

2012-06-25 Thread Brad Bendily
I don't know about best practice in this case, but I decided to put our reverse 
entries into one super netting file as you call it.

We had the same problem that a lot of reverse entries were missing, so I wrote
a script to parse the forward file and create the reverse. Then I incorporated
that into my adding a new entry process so, I never add a reverse entry now, 
the script creates it. For that matter, all of our forward entries are in one 
file as well.

I don't need to look at DNS to find my network structure. I just want DNS to do 
DNS.

bb
 

-Original Message-
From: bind-users-bounces+brad.bendily=la@lists.isc.org 
[mailto:bind-users-bounces+brad.bendily=la@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of nex6
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 4:03 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Reverse zones best practices



Hi all,

look for some info on best practices for reverse zones. I have, a pretty big IP 
space and alot of reverse zones are not created.
I want to clean it up, a few people that dont really know DNS are thinking of 
super netting eg a top level 10.0.0.0/16 sorta thing. 

but we have 100s of defined mission critical reverse zones defined at the vlan 
level of 10.x.x.0/24...  my thinking, would be do a discovery and create all 
the /24s, even if there is like 100s. instead of the bigger super net...


what would be the best practice and the way to go?



-Nex6

___
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: CNAME Rules

2012-06-25 Thread Mark Andrews

In message CA+zrinE1sHkojS1fCNdcgZtF-+QQrTkqmRcfXZ1kUiBr=sq...@mail.gmail.com
, Srinivas Krishnan writes:
 The RFC rules on CNAMEs is fairly tight but I am seeing an increasing
 amount of traffic with misconfigured CNAMEs some of which are accepted
 by BIND as valid responses. The examples capture three trends, note
 these are actual responses:

Named first parses the response to extract the records into
RRsets.  Responses with multiple CNAMES are detected at
this point and get rejected.  Named then tries to interpet
the parsed message and once it has seen the CNAME and
associated RRSIGs it stops processing the result and issues
a new query for the target of the CNAME.  This is done to
stop the cache being poisoned.

 1) Example-1: CNAME in the additional section necessary to finish
 processing of response. BIND accepts this as valid:
 
 proto: DNS: id=febd qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=7
 nscount=6 arcount=7
 query: after12.failblog.org. A IN
 answer: after12.failblog.org. CNAME IN TTL=3600 chzallnighter.wordpress.c
 om.
 answer: vip-lb.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=300 72.233.104.123
 nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns1.wordpress.com.
 nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns2.wordpress.com.
 additional: chzallnighter.wordpress.com. CNAME IN TTL=300
 vip-lb.wordpress.com.
 additional: ns1.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 72.233.69.14
 additional: ns2.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 76.74.159.137
 
 2) Example-2: Multiple CNAMEs with same label but different data, BIND
 finds this to be incorrect and retries if another nameserver is
 available:
 
 
 proto: DNS: id=8faa qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2 nscount=13
 query: image.dhgate.com. A IN
 answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.chinacache.net.
 answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com.
 nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 a.root-servers.net.
 nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 b.root-servers.net.
 nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 c.root-servers.net.
 
 3) Example-3: Multiple CNAMEs with same and data, BIND finds this to
 be incorrect as well and retries.
 
 proto: DNS: id=a0f6 qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2
 nscount=3 arcount=3
 query: www.smilebox.com. A IN
 answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
 answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
 nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns1.smilebox.com.
 nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns2.smilebox.com.
 nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns3.smilebox.com.
 additional: ns1.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 207.66.132.8
 additional: ns2.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 216.218.214.52
 additional: ns3.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 71.164.20.101
 
 
 My question really what are the rules governing CNAME processing in
 BIND and why does Example-1 allowed as valid.
 
 
 -srinivas
 ___
 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
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
___
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: CNAME Rules

2012-06-25 Thread Chuck Swiger
On Jun 25, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Srinivas Krishnan wrote:
 You are using a caching resolver to check the responses and you only see 
 response after its been resolved by Google's DNS server.

The overwhelming majority of Internet users are using caching resolvers running 
at their ISP, employer, etc.  :-)

 Try dig @ns1.wordpress.comafter12.failblog.org. to see the actual records 
 that you would receive if you were a DNS server performing an authoritative 
 query to wordpress.
 
 Is having a CNAME in the additional section regular CNAME chaining, my 
 understanding was that additional sections do not contain CNAMEs. 

The wordpress nameserver is hoping to short-circuit a series of requests 
following the CNAME chain by including the data in the additional section:

% dig after12.failblog.org. @ns1.wordpress.com
[ ... ]
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 27255
;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 7, AUTHORITY: 6, ADDITIONAL: 7
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;after12.failblog.org.  IN  A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
after12.failblog.org.   3600IN  CNAME   chzallnighter.wordpress.com.
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   300 IN  A   74.200.247.187
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   300 IN  A   74.200.247.59
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   300 IN  A   76.74.255.117
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   300 IN  A   72.233.104.123
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   300 IN  A   72.233.127.217
vip-lb.wordpress.com.   300 IN  A   76.74.255.123

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
wordpress.com.  14400   IN  NS  ns1.wordpress.com.
wordpress.com.  14400   IN  NS  ns2.wordpress.com.
wordpress.com.  14400   IN  NS  ns3.wordpress.com.
wordpress.com.  14400   IN  NS  ns4.wordpress.com.
wordpress.com.  14400   IN  NS  ns5.wordpress.com.
wordpress.com.  14400   IN  NS  ns6.wordpress.com.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
chzallnighter.wordpress.com. 300 IN CNAME   vip-lb.wordpress.com.
ns1.wordpress.com.  14400   IN  A   72.233.69.14
ns2.wordpress.com.  14400   IN  A   76.74.159.137
ns3.wordpress.com.  14400   IN  A   64.34.177.159
ns4.wordpress.com.  14400   IN  A   72.233.104.98
ns5.wordpress.com.  14400   IN  A   69.174.248.140
ns6.wordpress.com.  14400   IN  A   64.34.174.135

A paranoid nameserver would discard the A records in the ANSWER section and the 
CNAME for ADDITIONAL SECTION as not matching the query, but then it would have 
to follow the CNAME and look those records up anyway...

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck

___
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: CNAME Rules

2012-06-25 Thread Srinivas Krishnan
Mark,

Is the first parsing step over both Answer and Additional sections, I was under 
the impression that Named parses the response into RRSets from the Answer 
section and if there is a CNAME chain both within the same zone it follows the 
chain as well. But no additional sections are checked for CNAMEs. Is that 
correct ?

-srinivas

On Monday, June 25, 2012 5:53:04 PM UTC-4, Mark Andrews wrote:
 In message 
 CA+zrinE1sHkojS1fCNdcgZtF-+QQrTkqmRcfXZ1kUiBr=sq...@mail.gmail.com
 , Srinivas Krishnan writes:
  The RFC rules on CNAMEs is fairly tight but I am seeing an increasing
  amount of traffic with misconfigured CNAMEs some of which are accepted
  by BIND as valid responses. The examples capture three trends, note
  these are actual responses:
 
   Named first parses the response to extract the records into
   RRsets.  Responses with multiple CNAMES are detected at
   this point and get rejected.  Named then tries to interpet
   the parsed message and once it has seen the CNAME and
   associated RRSIGs it stops processing the result and issues
   a new query for the target of the CNAME.  This is done to
   stop the cache being poisoned.
 
  1) Example-1: CNAME in the additional section necessary to finish
  processing of response. BIND accepts this as valid:
  
  proto: DNS: id=febd qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=7
  nscount=6 arcount=7
  query: after12.failblog.org. A IN
  answer: after12.failblog.org. CNAME IN TTL=3600 
  chzallnighter.wordpress.c
  om.
  answer: vip-lb.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=300 72.233.104.123
  nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns1.wordpress.com.
  nameserver: wordpress.com. NS IN TTL=14400 ns2.wordpress.com.
  additional: chzallnighter.wordpress.com. CNAME IN TTL=300
  vip-lb.wordpress.com.
  additional: ns1.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 72.233.69.14
  additional: ns2.wordpress.com. A IN TTL=14400 76.74.159.137
  
  2) Example-2: Multiple CNAMEs with same label but different data, BIND
  finds this to be incorrect and retries if another nameserver is
  available:
  
  
  proto: DNS: id=8faa qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2 nscount=13
  query: image.dhgate.com. A IN
  answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.chinacache.net.
  answer: image.dhgate.com. CNAME IN TTL=7200 image.dhgate.com.cdn20.com.
  nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 a.root-servers.net.
  nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 b.root-servers.net.
  nameserver: . NS IN TTL=518400 c.root-servers.net.
  
  3) Example-3: Multiple CNAMEs with same and data, BIND finds this to
  be incorrect as well and retries.
  
  proto: DNS: id=a0f6 qr=1 QUERY AA NOERROR qdcount=1 ancount=2
  nscount=3 arcount=3
  query: www.smilebox.com. A IN
  answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
  answer: www.smilebox.com. CNAME IN TTL=3600 www.g.smilebox.com.
  nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns1.smilebox.com.
  nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns2.smilebox.com.
  nameserver: smilebox.com. NS IN TTL=86400 ns3.smilebox.com.
  additional: ns1.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 207.66.132.8
  additional: ns2.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 216.218.214.52
  additional: ns3.smilebox.com. A IN TTL=86400 71.164.20.101
  
  
  My question really what are the rules governing CNAME processing in
  BIND and why does Example-1 allowed as valid.
  
  
  -srinivas
  ___
  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
 -- 
 Mark Andrews, ISC
 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
 PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org

___
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: CNAME Rules

2012-06-25 Thread Srinivas Krishnan
Chuck,

I am talking from the point of view of a DNS server not a client resolver. 
Anyways note that the entire CNAME chain is from the same wordpress zone, so 
the chain should be followed without requiring an additional query and there is 
no need for trying to short circuit the process by adding it into the 
Additional section. Am  I wrong ?

-srinivas

On Monday, June 25, 2012 5:55:50 PM UTC-4, Chuck Swiger wrote:
 On Jun 25, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Srinivas Krishnan wrote:
  You are using a caching resolver to check the responses and you only see 
  response after its been resolved by Google's DNS server.
 
 The overwhelming majority of Internet users are using caching resolvers 
 running at their ISP, employer, etc.  :-)
 
  Try dig @ns1.wordpress.comafter12.failblog.org. to see the actual records 
  that you would receive if you were a DNS server performing an authoritative 
  query to wordpress.
  
  Is having a CNAME in the additional section regular CNAME chaining, my 
  understanding was that additional sections do not contain CNAMEs. 
 
 The wordpress nameserver is hoping to short-circuit a series of requests 
 following the CNAME chain by including the data in the additional section:
 
 % dig after12.failblog.org. @ns1.wordpress.com
 [ ... ]
 ;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 27255
 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 7, AUTHORITY: 6, ADDITIONAL: 7
 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
 
 ;; QUESTION SECTION:
 ;after12.failblog.org.IN  A
 
 ;; ANSWER SECTION:
 after12.failblog.org. 3600IN  CNAME   chzallnighter.wordpress.com.
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 300 IN  A   74.200.247.187
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 300 IN  A   74.200.247.59
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 300 IN  A   76.74.255.117
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 300 IN  A   72.233.104.123
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 300 IN  A   72.233.127.217
 vip-lb.wordpress.com. 300 IN  A   76.74.255.123
 
 ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
 wordpress.com.14400   IN  NS  ns1.wordpress.com.
 wordpress.com.14400   IN  NS  ns2.wordpress.com.
 wordpress.com.14400   IN  NS  ns3.wordpress.com.
 wordpress.com.14400   IN  NS  ns4.wordpress.com.
 wordpress.com.14400   IN  NS  ns5.wordpress.com.
 wordpress.com.14400   IN  NS  ns6.wordpress.com.
 
 ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
 chzallnighter.wordpress.com. 300 IN   CNAME   vip-lb.wordpress.com.
 ns1.wordpress.com.14400   IN  A   72.233.69.14
 ns2.wordpress.com.14400   IN  A   76.74.159.137
 ns3.wordpress.com.14400   IN  A   64.34.177.159
 ns4.wordpress.com.14400   IN  A   72.233.104.98
 ns5.wordpress.com.14400   IN  A   69.174.248.140
 ns6.wordpress.com.14400   IN  A   64.34.174.135
 
 A paranoid nameserver would discard the A records in the ANSWER section and 
 the CNAME for ADDITIONAL SECTION as not matching the query, but then it would 
 have to follow the CNAME and look those records up anyway...
 
 Regards,
 -- 
 -Chuck

___
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


Duplicates in newsgroup gateway

2012-06-25 Thread Barry Margolin
I read bind-users through the comp.protocols.dns.bind newsgroup. I'm 
seeing lots of duplicate posts. Most of the replies in the CNAME Rules 
thread showed up twice.

Is there a problem with the gateway?

-- 
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA
___
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: Duplicates in newsgroup gateway

2012-06-25 Thread David Ford

it's posted 2x, slightly different.

To: comp.protocols.dns.b...@googlegroups.com
To: comp-protocols-dns-b...@isc.org

both cc the newsgroup

-david

On 06/25/2012 06:11 PM, Barry Margolin wrote:

I read bind-users through the comp.protocols.dns.bind newsgroup. I'm
seeing lots of duplicate posts. Most of the replies in the CNAME Rules
thread showed up twice.

Is there a problem with the gateway?




___
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: Duplicates in newsgroup gateway

2012-06-25 Thread Dan Mahoney


On Mon, 25 Jun 2012, David Ford wrote:

 it's posted 2x, slightly different.
 
 To: comp.protocols.dns.b...@googlegroups.com
 To: comp-protocols-dns-b...@isc.org

I suspect this is an artifact of people starting a thread one place and 
cc'ing one reflector or the other.  I'll see if I can reach out to the 
googlegroups folks and figure a way to sort this.

-Dan

___
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