Funny email address.
I could be wrong, but it looks like you might have a firewall problem. The one
really slow response is the one over 512 bytes. Is it possible you have a
firewall that examines the contents of DNS messages?
Regards,
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 21, 2016, at 12:34 PM,
your traffic by getting a pcap via tcpdump and then analyzi=
> ng it in wireshark. Packets don't lie.
>
> John
>
> Sent from Nine<http://www.9folders.com/>
>
> From: Pol Hallen
> Sent: Sep 21, 2016 2:35 PM
> To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
> Subject: Re: for
Pol,
You can "audit" your traffic by getting a pcap via tcpdump and then analyzing
it in wireshark. Packets don't lie.
John
Sent from Nine<http://www.9folders.com/>
From: Pol Hallen
Sent: Sep 21, 2016 2:35 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: forwarder (YES/NO)
hello again!
try running dig +trace and see how fast it runs. It should return
in about same time as BIND does (when it doesn't have anything in cache).
; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4-Debian <<>> +trace @192.168.1.212 yahoo.it
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
. 518367 I
so simply leave BIND running and see if it's better tomorrow...
On 21.09.16 09:29, Pol Hallen wrote:
seems better today, but how I realize if bind runs correclty? I mean:
if the speed of it is normal or if there are lags?
try running dig +trace and see how fast it runs. It should return
in a
so simply leave BIND running and see if it's better tomorrow...
hello,
seems better today, but how I realize if bind runs correclty? I mean: if
the speed of it is normal or if there are lags?
Now I tested some domains, almost all are ok but 2 of these are slow...
using @8.8.8.8 with these tw
with 9.10, leave prefetch on and see...
On 20.09.16 15:12, Pol Hallen wrote:
I've 9.9.5 version on debian stable :-/
so simply leave BIND running and see if it's better tomorrow...
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail
just leave bind running for some time.
:-)
with 9.10, leave prefetch on and see...
I've 9.9.5 version on debian stable :-/
thanks
Pol
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-users ma
Am 20.09.2016 um 15:03 schrieb Pol Hallen:
what happend if you leave it working (without forwarders) for some time?
BIND should cache frequently used data and provide them quickly.
I don't know. I start now testing without forwarders and tonight I see
when you use google forwarder, the main
On 20.09.16 15:03, Pol Hallen wrote:
what happend if you leave it working (without forwarders) for some time?
BIND should cache frequently used data and provide them quickly.
I don't know. I start now testing without forwarders and tonight I see
when you use google forwarder, the main differe
what happend if you leave it working (without forwarders) for some time?
BIND should cache frequently used data and provide them quickly.
I don't know. I start now testing without forwarders and tonight I see
when you use google forwarder, the main difference is that most of those
data are pro
Am 20.09.2016 um 12:29 schrieb Pol Hallen:
without forwarder, using dig command, "query time" only on some domains
(I tested italian domains - I live in Italy) is 350-800ms, with
forwarder almost always is less 100ms (!)
I'd like have my BIND (no forwarder) that works for my lan :-)
which is
On 20.09.16 12:29, Pol Hallen wrote:
I've a quad core 2.4Ghz with standard italian DSL
I tested BIND with either forwarder activated and disactivated
forwarders {
8.8.8.8; 8.8.4.4;
};
without forwarder, using dig command, "query time" only on some
domains (I tested i
Hi all :-)
I've a quad core 2.4Ghz with standard italian DSL
I tested BIND with either forwarder activated and disactivated
forwarders {
8.8.8.8; 8.8.4.4;
};
without forwarder, using dig command, "query time" only on some domains
(I tested italian domains - I live
14 matches
Mail list logo
