Based on that I'm pretty confident you can remove this as being a general DNS server issue.
I would not attempt to even change the configuration in bind at this point as to not introduce more potential changes into your env as doing those tests will have mostly validated the DNS server is working as expected. If you can query out from the bind server, and your clients can query it without an issue I would be looking into other network connectivity issues that could be going on. Could be a variety of issues like if you are using a local proxy, IP conflicts, browser settings using https for dns, isp issues? The errors, and behavior you are describing doesn't stick out to me and a "dns issue". May 9, 2025 11:06:08 PM bi...@clearviz.biz: >>From the instance with bind running, can you query both your defined >>forwarders? Does it work consistently for a variety of domains? > >>dig @1.1.1.1 isc.org >>dig @8.8.8.8 isc.org > > *Yes, it does. The above two commands work as well as several other domains I > tried, and the response has been immediate. * > >>From the clients can you use nslookup or dig to query the bind instance >>directly by specifying the ip and get consistent resolution from it for >>different names? > > *Yes. From my Windows 7 desktop client I use the "Command Prompt" with > "nslookup" and get perfect and immediate results by specifying my DNS > server's hard IP. Furthermore, I ran the same command with no server > specified and it defaulted to my server's BIND instance and gave the same > immediate results. Unfortunately, I do not have "dig" on my Windows7 > clients.* > >> Have you validated the DNS server IPs that are assigned to the clients have >> the correct IP(s) set for the bind server? > > *Yes, they all do. They are set to the machine's IP on which the DNS > instance is running.* > >> Are you sure there is only 1 dhcp service active on the network? Is the WAP >> doing dhcp as well and giving conflicting options maybe? > > *Yes, there is only one (1). The WAP is not capable of performing DHCP > service. It only passes through requests to the DHCP server on my machine. I > can verify this by examining the list of active leases on my DHCP server. * > > > On 2025-05-09 18:33, Eric wrote: > >> I get a feeling this is going to be less of a bind issue, and more so some >> other configuration issue(s). >> >> From the instance with bind running, can you query both your defined >> forwarders? Does it work consistently for a variety of domains? >> >> dig @1.1.1.1 isc.org >> dig @8.8.8.8 isc.org >> >> From the clients can you use nslookup or dig to query the bind instance >> directly by specifying the ip and get consistent resolution from it for >> different names? >> >> Have you validated the DNS server IPs that are assigned to the clients have >> the correct IP(s) set for the bind server? >> >> >> Is the browser using the OS settings for dns, or are they trying to do DNS >> over https directly out to the Internet to other dns servers? >> >> Are you sure there is only 1 dhcp service active on the network? Is the WAP >> doing dhcp as well and giving conflicting options maybe? >> >> >> >> May 9, 2025 6:58:47 PM bi...@clearviz.biz: >> >>> Howdy all!. My name is Arnold, and I'm new to both Bind9 and to the Bind >>> user's list. I'm hoping to contribute my findings on the use of Bind9. in >>> the future but, for now, I need some help in getting my 1st install of Bind >>> 9.18 performing well. It does run already, but does not perform well at >>> all. I'll explain. >>> >>> >>> First, a quick bit of history. I run a home network (a full domain >>> structure) and, for the past 23 years, I ran a server (Windows Server 2003) >>> as a full Primary Domain Controller in my home network. I ran DHCP, DNS and >>> AD on that server. It worked great and had extremely fast responses for DNS >>> forwarding. Very rarely was there ever a failure (i.e. "Site not found" or >>> "No Internet Access") etc. And it ran great for almost 23 years.... Until >>> this past Easter Sunday, when it died a nasty hardware death. I deemed it >>> unworthy of repairing. This because, 2 years ago, I began building two new >>> mid-tower machines (Intel coreI7 and was going to install Ubuntu Server >>> (22.04) on one and the 22.04 client on the other. I completed the client >>> machine and it is up and running perfectly. I held off on the server as my >>> Win2003 server was still running. But not anymore. >>> >>> I resumed the build of the Ubuntu Server (22.04). I installed >>> ISC-DHCP-Server for DHCP (I know Kea is available but I read where that >>> needs Ubuntu 24.xx+). I also installed Bind9.18 as the DNS server. The DHCP >>> server is working perfectly. No issues at all. Very happy with it. The >>> Bind9.18, not so much. BTW, I'll deal with an AD replacement later if at >>> all (Samba, Kerberos or something similar). >>> >>> The following are the behavioral symptoms of the current Bind9.18 install. >>> >>> 1. Links/URLs - Links/URLs submitted in a browser (especially a link not >>> used before or not after a long while) often take a very long time to >>> render and often fail with a "Can't access that site" or "No Internet >>> Access" error. if I keep refreshing the same link/URL multiple times, >>> eventually the webpage will render correctly. And the site will continue to >>> render correctly as long as I keep it active by clicking other links, etc. >>> on the page. But once there has been a period of inactivity (usually 1/2 >>> to 1 hr), it goes back to the original behavior, requiring another cycle of >>> "refreshes" and "site not found" errors, before it renders correctly again. >>> That said, I'm starting to see continuity on the URLs/Links I use on a >>> daily basis (i.e. only once a day). >>> 2. When using "ping," if I ping the hard IP, it works correctly. If I use >>> the domain name with Ping, it fails on a "name resolution" error. However, >>> using "nslookup" with the same domain names does work correctly. Cannot use >>> traceroute as it is not presently installed and attempting to install it >>> gives "Temporary failure resolving the ubuntu archive DBs. >>> 3. Devices that had connected to my Wireless access point (WAP) that are >>> "DNS dependent" also fail due to "No Internet access," including my >>> smartphone in Wifi Mode. My phone does not fail when in "5G" mode, but >>> that's expensive. FTR, my router is "wired" but I have a WAP connected to >>> it via Ethernet. Devices that connect to it can get DHCP service, but fail >>> when DNS is attempted. My laptops do not connect via WiFi anymore. I can >>> get one of my laptops connected if I 'Tether" it to my smartphone while in >>> "5G" mode. >>> >>> All of the above leads me to believe that Bind 9 may not be configured >>> correctly to allow for the best possible performance/response times by the >>> forwarding servers (8.8.8.8 and 1.1.1.1). I have attached my >>> named.conf.options file and .local file. The named.conf file only has >>> includes for .options and ,local conf files. The .default-zones file is >>> commented out. >>> >>> If you need other info about my configuration and setup, please feel free >>> to ask and I'll do my best to provide it. >>> >>> Thank you all so much and I look forward to learning from you. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Arnold >>> >>> >
-- Visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list ISC funds the development of this software with paid support subscriptions. Contact us at https://www.isc.org/contact/ for more information. bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
