>you claim the SOA serial being a timestamp would have helped in
diagnosis.
Actually, I did not.
tux2bsd:
>> The SOA record could do with some attention too.
...
>> That is true but it doesn't help when trouble shooting.
Those comments were simply an observation passed along after
I raised the
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 07:14:58AM +, tux2bsd wrote:
> I understand you're choosing to be ornery about
> the SOA record. Seems to matter more to you lot
> than to me, given the defense being run around it.
You claim the SOA serial being a timestamp would have helped in
diagnosis. It would
I understand you're choosing to be ornery about
the SOA record. Seems to matter more to you lot
than to me, given the defense being run around it.
> The issue was spotted
You're welcome.
Only 1 of your 10 name servers was returning an
A record, when I raised the issue.
> and fixed.
What
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 06:29:02AM +, tux2bsd wrote:
> > > Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > well, if you're nitpicking things which don't matter
>
> I would have rather not have needed to look at all.
>
> Useful: when was a change made, who to contact.
> (strangely enough, easy to provide via
> > Stuart Henderson wrote:
> well, if you're nitpicking things which don't matter
I would have rather not have needed to look at all.
Useful: when was a change made, who to contact.
(strangely enough, easy to provide via SOA)
OpenBSD list: fuck that, deflection is more fun
>> Host openbsd.org
On 2023-11-16, tux2bsd wrote:
> Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> > Convention is either date of last update MMDDNN or, date +%s
>> > 1218140044 is neither.
>>
>>
>> Serial can be absolutely anything the admin wants to use as long as they
>> follow the rules for rollover
>
> That is true but it
Hi,
On 16 Nov 2023, at 9:32, tux2bsd wrote:
> RNAME:
>
> r...@openbsd.org is not a valid email address. I attempted emailing that
> yesterday, bounced. Some bounce info at the end.
>
the RNAME can be just a dot "." to indicate that this zone does not have an
email address that can be used. As
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > Convention is either date of last update MMDDNN or, date +%s
> > 1218140044 is neither.
>
>
> Serial can be absolutely anything the admin wants to use as long as they
> follow the rules for rollover
That is true but it doesn't help when trouble shooting.
> (btw
On 2023-11-16, tux2bsd wrote:
It'd be good to sort this, a bit of a meta remote hole...
>
> Maybe I could have said "remote black hole".
>
> Otto:
>>> The persons capable of fixing this are traveling right now
>> (and openbsd.org does have an A record).
>> things are fixed now
>
> You're
>>> It'd be good to sort this, a bit of a meta remote hole...
Maybe I could have said "remote black hole".
Otto:
>> The persons capable of fixing this are traveling right now
> (and openbsd.org does have an A record).
> things are fixed now
You're welcome.
The SOA record could do with some
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 11:49:05AM +, Craig Skinner wrote:
> Hello,
>
> OpenBSD's root A record was deliberately removed about 5-10 years ago.
>
> The website is http://www.openbsd.org, not http://openbsd.org
>
> I can't find the thread of complaints from the time it changed.
>
> Cheers,
Hello,
OpenBSD's root A record was deliberately removed about 5-10 years ago.
The website is http://www.openbsd.org, not http://openbsd.org
I can't find the thread of complaints from the time it changed.
Cheers,
Craig.
On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 08:43:06AM +, tux2bsd wrote:
>
> It'd be good to sort this, a bit of a meta remote hole...
>
> This = bad. Only people with necessary access can fix.
>
> $ host -t a openbsd.org 199.185.230.19
> Using domain server:
> Name: 199.185.230.19
> Address:
It'd be good to sort this, a bit of a meta remote hole...
This = bad. Only people with necessary access can fix.
$ host -t a openbsd.org 199.185.230.19
Using domain server:
Name: 199.185.230.19
Address: 199.185.230.19#53
Aliases:
Host openbsd.org not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
$ host -t a
14 matches
Mail list logo
