If I use dig NS domain name I know I will see the NS records for the domain.
I know I can do the same thing for other RR types. In the case where a zone
file has RR records that define delegation for subdomains why can't I use this
dig command to see those delegations? I assume this is easy
Can someone explain the following dig results? The first dig @8.8.8.8 provides
the expected result
: dig +noall +answer google-public-dns-a.google.com @8.8.8.8
google-public-dns-a.google.com. 85040 IN A 8.8.8.8
We get the same result from KLOTH.NET
: BIND 9.3 problem with semi-colon comments in zone file
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 11:48:33 +1100
In message blu156-w399b8d944d112abd5d1049f3...@phx.gbl, M. Meadows writes:
We've seen DNS reload issues with zone files with lines that begin with a
; that don't have a directly after the semi
: dig mta.news.getaroomgetadeal.com +noall +answer @4.2.2.1
; DiG 9.3.6-P1-RedHat-9.3.6-4.P1.el5_4.2
mta.news.getaroomgetadeal.com +noall +answer @4.2.2.1
;; global options: printcmd
: dig news.getaroomgetadeal.com +nssearch @4.2.2.1
SOA ns1.exacttarget.com. hostmaster.exacttarget.com.
are seeing ... where dig on
fqdn fails until we do dig with +nssearch on the domain?
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:57:33 +
From: d...@dotat.at
To: sun-g...@live.com
CC: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: odd dig results for fqdn
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, M. Meadows wrote:
Any thoughts
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, M. Meadows wrote:
Question : our check of whois indicates that ns1.thehartford.com and
ns2.thehartford.com are
the authoritative nameservers for thehartford.com. A dig with a +trace for
eftc.thehartford.com seems to indicate that they are indeed the auth
: question about thehartford.com domain
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011, M. Meadows wrote:
Question : our check of whois indicates that ns1.thehartford.com and
ns2.thehartford.com are
the authoritative nameservers for thehartford.com. A dig with a +trace for
eftc.thehartford.com seems to indicate
...@gmail.com, David Sparro writes:
On 6/15/2011 7:41 PM, M. Meadows wrote:
The DNS admins at thehartford.com seem to feel that this nameserver
mismatch is working as expected.
So I'm just wondering if anyone still feels that the nameserver mismatch
seen with the digs in earlier
Seeing some flakey feedback from spinsix.com domain today.
dig spinsix.com +nssearch ... times out or fails.
Is that domain borked?
Thanks,
Martin Meadows
___
Please visit
Just wondering why dig with nssearch and @ip produced two different answers
when I ran it today.
I assume the @8.8.8.8 (in the example below) isn't actually happening ... or it
happened in one test and not the other.
The results below were exactly as I saw them in the order that they are
Wondering why we get variable results from the following command:dig
eftc.thehartford.com
(sometimes we get authority section and additional section feedback ...
sometimes we don't)
Usually we see the following:
; DiG 9.3.6-P1-RedHat-9.3.6-4.P1.el5_4.2 eftc.thehartford.com
;; global
thanks for the helpful feedback guys!
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 10:14:55 -0600
From: d...@maplepark.com
To: sun-g...@live.com
CC: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: variable dig results
On Fri, 6 Jan 2012, M. Meadows wrote:
Wondering why we get variable results from
dig -t any e.hushpuppies-australia.com @ns.domainnetwork.se
; DiG 9.3.6-P1-RedHat-9.3.6-4.P1.el5_4.2 -t any
e.hushpuppies-australia.com @ns.domainnetwork.se
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 19181
;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER:
Mmmm ... nevermind. Nothing wrong with the delegation. The
e.hushpuppies-australia.com zone file isn't set up yet! Sorry.
From: sun-g...@live.com
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: what's wrong with the e.hushpuppies-australia.com delegation
@ns.domainnetwork.se ?
Date: Mon, 27 Feb
We've noticed that the following command gets a variable result:
dig -t txt exacttarget.com @ns2.exacttarget.com +short
We get 2 results from this. Seems to be somewhat random. They are:
v=spf1 a mx ip4:207.250.79.101 ip4:207.67.98.192/27 ip4:72.18.216.98
include:cust-spf.exacttarget.com
Thanks to both of you for your feedback.
I see the rrset ordering explanation in the arm.
Good information.
To: sun-g...@live.com
CC: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: dig -t txt output variation
From: wbr...@e1b.org
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 13:54:47 -0500
sun-guru wrote on
So ... if we have
exacttarget.com delegated to ns1 and ns2.exacttarget.com nameservers
and ... we manage the s6.exacttarget.com zone file from ns1 and
ns2.exacttarget.com
but we don't delegate s6 in the exacttarget.com zone file ... forgot to enter
it in the zone file ...
how is it
for
s6, it follows the NS records of the parent which happen to be the same name
server as s6. On the other hand, if you had attempted to master s6 on a
different name server, it would not have worked.
On 05/07/2012 12:32 PM, M. Meadows wrote:
So ... if we have
exacttarget.com delegated
dig www.careerone.com.au +short @8.8.8.8
www.careerone.com.au.edgesuite.net.
a903.g.akamai.net.
208.44.23.99
208.44.23.121
Why does the above dig work when
dig careerone.com.au +nssearch @8.8.8.8
SOA dns0.news.com.au. hostmaster.news.com.au. 2012082200 3600 1200 86400 1200
from server
:45, M. Meadows wrote:
dig www.careerone.com.au +short @8.8.8.8
www.careerone.com.au.edgesuite.net.
a903.g.akamai.net.
208.44.23.99
208.44.23.121
Why does the above dig work when
If you try
dig +trace www.careerone.com.au
you'll find that the www... subdomain
9:45 AM, M. Meadows wrote:
dig www.careerone.com.au +short @8.8.8.8
www.careerone.com.au.edgesuite.net.
a903.g.akamai.net.
208.44.23.99
208.44.23.121
Why does the above dig work when
Attempting to determine if a stub zone requires any kind of zone transfer.
Reading through online doc I find mixed opinions. Here's one:
…
Stub-Zones do receive their information by just querying DNS-Servers instead of
requesting a Zone-Transfer. You can even add Stub-Zones for Zones where
Does anyone know why dig brownmackie.com +nssearch only returns 5 auth
nameserver soa records?
A check of whois shows they have 7 auth nameservers.
A dig -t NS brownmackie.com @one of their auth nameservers shows 7
nameservers are delegated authority for the domain.
Is this a limitation of
Recently noticed that for 2 nameservers ns1.tbd.com and ns2.tbd.com (names are
changed to protect the innocent) the first nameserver consistently receives
twice as many queries as the 2nd nameserver.
Who can tell me why queries are distributed this way?
Any ideas?
I assume it's something
They are authoritative nameservers.
Thanks for the reply!
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 16:12:51 -0500
From: lkc...@ksu.edu
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: question about dns query distribution
Are these authoritative nameservers or resolving DNS servers?
If the latter, its probably
at 11:32 AM, M. Meadows sun-g...@live.com wrote:
Recently noticed that for 2 nameservers ns1.tbd.com and ns2.tbd.com (names are
changed to protect the innocent) the first nameserver consistently receives
twice as many queries as the 2nd nameserver.
Who can tell me why queries
We're seeing email failures to outlook.uga.edu.
dig uga.edu +nssearch shows only dns3.uga.edu responds with an soa record.
and
dig -t mx outlook.uga.edu @dns3.uga.edu returns an mx record.
outlook.uga.edu.86400 IN MX 10 707341637.mail.outlook.com.
And we see a
Question about rndc referral data. Running BIND 9.3 on an older nameserver and
BIND 9.7 on a somewhat newer one. These 2 nameservers sit under a load balancer
and get an equal number of queries. While examing rndc output on the 2
nameservers I noticed that the older one does about 100 referrals
Thinking about this ... perhaps this is more to do with the behavior of BIND
9.3 versus BIND 9.7. Did the referral mechanism change? Here are my thoughts on
the subject:
Nameserver A is the authority for zone1.com and it is the authority for
sub.zone1.com. Sub.zone1.com is delegated from
Looking at rndc stats output on an older BIND 9.3 nameserver versus output on a
new BIND 9.7 nameserver.
It seems that the 9.3 and 9.7 referrals and failures are flipped in rndc stats
output.
Does that make sense?
On the 9.3 nameserver I see a boatload of referrals and almost no failures.
Wondering about IDN support for BIND.
UTF-8 character set?
Searched for these in this forum and didn't find much.
May have missed it.
Anything helpful already out there for review?
Thanks!
Martin Meadows
Indianapolis, IN
31 matches
Mail list logo
