Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Cricket Liu
On Feb 3, 2012, at 9:53 AM, Cricket Liu wrote: > > On Feb 3, 2012, at 7:25 AM, Bill Owens wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Lear, Karen (Evolver) wrote: >>> Who would be responsible for opening a trouble report to GoDaddy? I don't >>> understand exactly what the problem is

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Cricket Liu
On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:43 AM, Casey Deccio wrote: On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Cricket Liu mailto:cric...@infoblox.com>> wrote: This is consistent with something I noticed earlier: DNSViz validates oppedahl.com's chain of trust without a problem, but Verisign Labs' DNS

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Casey Deccio
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Cricket Liu wrote: > This is consistent with something I noticed earlier: DNSViz validates > oppedahl.com's chain of trust without a problem, but Verisign Labs' > DNSSEC Debugger reports no response from oppedahl.com's name servers. > DNSViz is hosted by Sandia,

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Cricket Liu
On Feb 3, 2012, at 7:25 AM, Bill Owens wrote: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Lear, Karen (Evolver) wrote: >> Who would be responsible for opening a trouble report to GoDaddy? I don't >> understand exactly what the problem is here. > > It looks, from the outside, as though the Oppe

RE: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Lear, Karen (Evolver)
Thank you all very much for the assistance! On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Lear, Karen (Evolver) wrote: > Who would be responsible for opening a trouble report to GoDaddy? I don't > understand exactly what the problem is here. It looks, from the outside, as though the Oppedahl Patent

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Bill Owens
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:04:19AM -0500, Lear, Karen (Evolver) wrote: > Who would be responsible for opening a trouble report to GoDaddy? I don't > understand exactly what the problem is here. It looks, from the outside, as though the Oppedahl Patent Law Firm LLC uses GoDaddy for DNS registrat

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Florian Weimer
* Karen Lear: > Who would be responsible for opening a trouble report to GoDaddy? > I don't understand exactly what the problem is here. The DNS operator for oppedahl.com has a contactual relationship with Godaddy, so if they open a ticket with Godaddy, that would likely match Godaddy's business

RE: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Lear, Karen (Evolver)
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 02:12:43PM +, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Bill Owens: > > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:55:12PM +, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> These nameservers: > >> > >> dns2.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 208.109.255.50 > >> dns1.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Bill Owens
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 02:12:43PM +, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Bill Owens: > > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:55:12PM +, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> These nameservers: > >> > >> dns2.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 208.109.255.50 > >> dns1.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Florian Weimer
* Florian Weimer: > * Bill Owens: > >> On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:55:12PM +, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> These nameservers: >>> >>> dns2.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 208.109.255.50 >>> dns1.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 216.69.185.50 >>> >>> return SERVFAIL for EDNS0

RE: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Lear, Karen (Evolver)
* Bill Owens: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:55:12PM +, Florian Weimer wrote: >> These nameservers: >> >> dns2.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 208.109.255.50 >> dns1.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 216.69.185.50 >> >> return SERVFAIL for EDNS0 queries. COM contains a sig

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Florian Weimer
* Bill Owens: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:55:12PM +, Florian Weimer wrote: >> These nameservers: >> >> dns2.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 208.109.255.50 >> dns1.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 216.69.185.50 >> >> return SERVFAIL for EDNS0 queries. COM contains a sig

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Bill Owens
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:55:12PM +, Florian Weimer wrote: > These nameservers: > > dns2.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 208.109.255.50 > dns1.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 216.69.185.50 > > return SERVFAIL for EDNS0 queries. COM contains a signed delegation. > This

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Bill Owens
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 08:37:04AM -0500, Lear, Karen (Evolver) wrote: > Beginning sometime within the past few days, uspto.gov domain cannot resolve > oppedahl.com domain, but can resolve it from almost everywhere else. Some > free websites (http://centralops.net/co/) cannot resolve it as well.

Re: cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Florian Weimer
* Karen Lear: > Beginning sometime within the past few days, uspto.gov domain cannot > resolve oppedahl.com domain, but can resolve it from almost everywhere > else. These nameservers: dns2.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A 208.109.255.50 dns1.oppedahl.com. 172800 IN A

cannot resolve oppedahl.com from uspto.gov domain

2012-02-03 Thread Lear, Karen (Evolver)
Beginning sometime within the past few days, uspto.gov domain cannot resolve oppedahl.com domain, but can resolve it from almost everywhere else. Some free websites (http://centralops.net/co/) cannot resolve it as well. I want to verify that uspto.gov doesn't need to correct anything on our en

Re: bind crash with max-refresh-time 0;

2012-02-03 Thread Miek Gieben
[ Quoting at 10:50 on Feb 3 in "Re: bind crash with ..." ] > >Does this also stop a slave from checking when it receives a > >notify? The documentation isn't clear on that. > > configure master not to send notifies then. Alternatively, you can > deny notifies from master. But the first Mark's qu

Re: bind crash with max-refresh-time 0;

2012-02-03 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
[ Quoting at 11:10 on Feb 3 in "Re: bind crash with ..." ] > I'm using the following settings in named.conf: > > max-refresh-time 0; > min-refresh-time 0; > max-retry-time 0; > min-retry-time 0; > multi-master yes; What are you trying to achieve? A slave it needs to check that its copy of the

Re: bind crash with max-refresh-time 0;

2012-02-03 Thread Miek Gieben
[ Quoting at 11:10 on Feb 3 in "Re: bind crash with ..." ] > > I'm using the following settings in named.conf: > > > > max-refresh-time 0; > > min-refresh-time 0; > > max-retry-time 0; > > min-retry-time 0; > > multi-master yes; > > What are you trying to achieve? A slave it needs to check tha