Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-04 Thread Warren Kumari
On Feb 4, 2011, at 1:11 PM, Chris Buxton wrote: > +trace does not do what you think it does. It does not query the target name > server for each successive query. Rather, it causes the 'dig' command to > perform recursion on its own, only using the indicated server (@server) to > seed its root

Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-04 Thread Mark Andrews
In message , Tory M Blue writes: > > So that was the trace between the client and the nameserver. =A0What > > about the trace between the nameserver and the rest of the world? > > > > The log message is trigger by multiple queries from your nameserver > > not being answered and named falling back

Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-04 Thread Tory M Blue
> So that was the trace between the client and the nameserver.  What > about the trace between the nameserver and the rest of the world? > > The log message is trigger by multiple queries from your nameserver > not being answered and named falling back simpler queries in a > attempt to get them ans

Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-04 Thread Mark Andrews
In message , Tory M Blue writes: > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:37 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Tory M. Blue: > > > >> [tblue@mx3 ~]$ dig @problemserver.net =A0www.yahoo.com =A0+trace > > > > Please use "dig @problemserver.net www.yahoo.com +trace +norecurse > > +dnssec", to match more closely th

Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-04 Thread Tory M Blue
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:37 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Tory M. Blue: > >> [tblue@mx3 ~]$ dig @problemserver.net  www.yahoo.com  +trace > > Please use "dig @problemserver.net www.yahoo.com +trace +norecurse > +dnssec", to match more closely the queires that BIND would send. Okay thanks, done th

Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-04 Thread Chris Buxton
+trace does not do what you think it does. It does not query the target name server for each successive query. Rather, it causes the 'dig' command to perform recursion on its own, only using the indicated server (@server) to seed its root server list. +trace also stops at the CNAME, and does not

Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-04 Thread Florian Weimer
* Tory M. Blue: > [tblue@mx3 ~]$ dig @problemserver.net www.yahoo.com +trace Please use "dig @problemserver.net www.yahoo.com +trace +norecurse +dnssec", to match more closely the queires that BIND would send. -- Florian Weimer BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/

Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-04 Thread Kalman Feher
On 4/02/11 3:07 AM, "Tory M Blue" wrote: > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Barry Margolin wrote: >> In article > SNIPPED< >> www.yahoo.com.    300   IN CNAME fp.wg1.b.yahoo.com. >> >> And even when they did, it didn't get involved until you followed the >> CNAME returned for www.yahoo.com.  

Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-03 Thread Tory M Blue
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Barry Margolin wrote: > In article SNIPPED< > www.yahoo.com.    300   IN CNAME fp.wg1.b.yahoo.com. > > And even when they did, it didn't get involved until you followed the > CNAME returned for www.yahoo.com.  Your log message above indicates an > issue just with th

Re: Akadns and Bind

2011-02-03 Thread Barry Margolin
In article , Tory M Blue wrote: > Second email in a single day, crazy. But I've had issues backing up > and just need to resolve them > > Again Bind bind-9.7.2-P3 behind F5 Loadbalancers. > > I'm running into an issue where one of the 2 servers will resolve > www.yahoo.com but the other will

Akadns and Bind

2011-02-03 Thread Tory M Blue
Second email in a single day, crazy. But I've had issues backing up and just need to resolve them Again Bind bind-9.7.2-P3 behind F5 Loadbalancers. I'm running into an issue where one of the 2 servers will resolve www.yahoo.com but the other will not (Same network), but both will resolve yahoo.c