does pfsense need real dns hosting maybe?
I hear: http://puck.nether.net/dns ... works.
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> registrar-servers.com.
Once upon a time, Ryan Rawdon said:
> Try .pfsense.org (see below) to avoid caching, since the
> problem in question does not rely on the name existing. I am able to
> reproduce it roughly every 3rd random string I try, definitely not every
> time. I am unable to reproduce it with other domai
On Jan 4, 2012, at 3:46 PM, Mark Kamichoff wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 09:39:39PM +0100, Seth Mos wrote:
>> And a similar mistake I see others respond too as well, this is
>> another domain with just a IPv4 record. That was not really what I was
>> complaining about but I was not specific en
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 09:39:39PM +0100, Seth Mos wrote:
> And a similar mistake I see others respond too as well, this is
> another domain with just a IPv4 record. That was not really what I was
> complaining about but I was not specific enough in my email
>
> When requesting the DNS for the hos
Hi!
So please stop responding with ping response times already :-)
No, pfSense does not set these per default, they are in wide use
because these are part of the Google DNS whitelist for V6 records.
And a similar mistake I see others respond too as well, this is another
domain with just a I
Hi,
Just pointing out to other responding to this thread that I was referring to
the *query* response times, I said nothing about ICMP which is perfectly fine.
So please stop responding with ping response times already :-)
No, pfSense does not set these per default, they are in wide use because
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 09:00:26PM +0100, Seth Mos wrote:
> I was wondering if many people are seeing horrendous latency on the
> free Hurricane Electric resolvers?
Looks fine to me:
(neodymium:15:27)% dig @74.82.42.42 cnn.com. A
; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> @74.82.42.42 cnn.com. A
; (1 server found)
;
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Seth Mos wrote:
> Hi Nanog, Owen,
>
> I was wondering if many people are seeing horrendous latency on the free
> Hurricane Electric resolvers?
>
> Both accessing the v4 or v6 resolvers have horrendous latency. This could
> well be coupled to their free nature and
Hi!
But I was wondering if a more permanent solution for these resolvers exist.
74.82.42.42 2373 msec
2001:470:20::2 2592 msec
The google DNS server I'm using is doing swimmingly so far, OpenDNS seems ok
too.
2001:4860:4860::8844 16 msec
[root@ipv6proxy ~]# ping 74.82.42.42
PING
Hi Nanog, Owen,
I was wondering if many people are seeing horrendous latency on the free
Hurricane Electric resolvers?
Both accessing the v4 or v6 resolvers have horrendous latency. This could well
be coupled to their free nature and popularity.
So far when contacting Hurricane Electric they r
10 matches
Mail list logo
