Thanks to both of you for your replies, +trace did show me the name servers for
the domain and which answered, I would still need to query the other name
servers but that's OK. I wasn't aware that the standard DNS reply would show
all A records for a domain - that's good to know, I wish I had a
On 29.01.20 19:12, Leroy Tennison wrote:
I ran into a situation here the IP (v4) address returned for a domain was
different from two systems. It turned out that two DNS servers served the
domain and were replying with different IP addresses (discovered by doing
whois on the domain followed by d
"dig +trace " will show the whole path to a given record from root
servers down through registrar to the name servers the registrar specifies.
From: bind-users On Behalf Of Leroy Tennison
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 2:13 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Getting all IP adresses for
I ran into a situation here the IP (v4) address returned for a domain was
different from two systems. It turned out that two DNS servers served the
domain and were replying with different IP addresses (discovered by doing whois
on the domain followed by dig @ for each name server). This led
m
Am 21.01.2020 um 16:40 schrieb Ondřej Surý:
> We are currently investigating performance degradation related to big IXFRs.
> Do you use ixfr-from-differences in your BIND configuration? You could try
> enforcing AFRX on salt change.
>
> This is currently tracked as
> https://gitlab.isc.org/is
Hello Niels!
Thanks for bringing this to attention. I have reported it before [1][2]
without response.
We see this regulary. AFAIS it happens actually always, but if the IXFR
is small, the performance decline is so short that you usually won't
notice it.
The bigger the zonechange ie NSEC3 change
6 matches
Mail list logo
