Re: [LUNI] Anyone using www.dns.net/dnsrd/ successfully?

From: Martin Maney (maney@pobox.com)
Date: Mon Mar 19 2001 - 15:01:15 CST

  • Next message: Peter A. Peterson II: "Re: [LUNI] Telnet Troubles"

    On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 01:33:52PM -0600, A.Khan wrote:
    > Am I missing something?

    There are a mess of other ways to query DNS servers, but as it happens
    "host" is one that I've overlooked all these years.

    > # host -t ns suryag-corp.com NS1.GRANITECANYON.COM
    > Using domain server:
    > Name: NS1.GRANITECANYON.COM
    > Address: 205.166.226.38
    > Aliases:

    It's not clear what's happening there. Let's try a different way of asking:

    $ dig @ns1.granitecanyon.com suryag-corp.com any

    ; <<>> DiG 8.1 <<>> @ns1.granitecanyon.com suryag-corp.com any
    ; (1 server found)
    ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
    ;; res_send to server ns1.granitecanyon.com 205.166.226.38: Connection
    timed out

    Okay, their ns1 isn't reachable (from here, at this time). Now that I see
    this, I have a notion that this was something else that used to happen, and
    an even bigger reason why I wasn't keen to use their DNS service.

    > # host -t ns suryag-corp.com NS2.GRANITECANYON.COM
    > Using domain server:
    > Name: NS2.GRANITECANYON.COM
    > Address: 204.1.217.148
    > Aliases:
    >
    > suryag-corp.com name server NS1.GRANITECANYON.com
    > suryag-corp.com name server NS2.GRANITECANYON.com

    $ dig @ns2.granitecanyon.com suryag-corp.com any

    ; <<>> DiG 8.1 <<>> @ns2.granitecanyon.com suryag-corp.com any
    ; (1 server found)
    ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
    ;; got answer:
    ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 10
    ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2
    ;; QUERY SECTION:
    ;; suryag-corp.com, type = ANY, class = IN

    ;; ANSWER SECTION:
    suryag-corp.com. 20h49m6s IN NS NS1.GRANITECANYON.com.
    suryag-corp.com. 20h49m6s IN NS NS2.GRANITECANYON.com.

    ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
    suryag-corp.com. 20h49m6s IN NS NS1.GRANITECANYON.com.
    suryag-corp.com. 20h49m6s IN NS NS2.GRANITECANYON.com.

    ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
    NS1.GRANITECANYON.com. 1D IN A 205.166.226.38
    NS2.GRANITECANYON.com. 1D IN A 204.1.217.148

    Well, that looks okay, but when I try it using nslookup (which displays
    things a bit differently [memo: must review dig man page]), there's a clear
    problem. When nslookup (with type = any set) queries a properly configured
    authoritative server, it reports on the zone's timeout figures, and shows
    more clearly that this is an authoritative answer. For example:

    [correction, later on: no, it doesn't look okay: it should look much more
    like the nslookup "good" results below, with some formatting changes. in
    particular, dig does show the SOA record info from a properly authoritative
    server. I seem to have misled myself earlier.]

    > set type=any
    > server cerebus.mcs.net
    Default Server: cerebus.mcs.net
    Address: 207.98.129.77

    > mcs.net
    Server: cerebus.mcs.net
    Address: 207.98.129.77

    mcs.net nameserver = ns1.winstar.net
    mcs.net nameserver = ns2.winstar.net
    mcs.net
            origin = ns1.winstar.net
            mail addr = dns.winstar.net
            serial = 2001031204
            refresh = 10800 (3H)
            retry = 3600 (1H)
            expire = 604800 (1W)
            minimum ttl = 3600 (1H)
    mcs.net internet address = 192.160.127.85
    mcs.net preference = 10, mail exchanger = mail.winstarmail.com
    mcs.net preference = 20, mail exchanger = relay.cioe.com
    mcs.net nameserver = ns1.winstar.net
    mcs.net nameserver = ns2.winstar.net
    ns1.winstar.net internet address = 63.140.240.254
    ns2.winstar.net internet address = 207.98.129.134
    mail.winstarmail.com internet address = 63.140.240.250
    relay.cioe.com internet address = 204.120.165.37

    Whereas a server that's not speaking authoritatively looks very different:

    > enteract.com
    Server: cerebus.mcs.net
    Address: 207.98.129.77

    Non-authoritative answer:
    enteract.com preference = 0, mail exchanger = pop3-3.enteract.com
    enteract.com preference = 10, mail exchanger = mx.enteract.com
    enteract.com preference = 0, mail exchanger = pop3-1.enteract.com
    enteract.com preference = 0, mail exchanger = pop3-2.enteract.com
    enteract.com nameserver = BIFROST.SEASTROM.com
    enteract.com nameserver = NS0.enteract.com

    Authoritative answers can be found from:
    enteract.com nameserver = BIFROST.SEASTROM.com
    enteract.com nameserver = NS0.enteract.com
    pop3-3.enteract.com internet address = 207.229.143.32
    mx.enteract.com internet address = 207.229.143.33
    pop3-1.enteract.com internet address = 207.229.143.14
    pop3-2.enteract.com internet address = 207.229.143.16
    BIFROST.SEASTROM.com internet address = 192.148.252.10
    NS0.enteract.com internet address = 207.229.143.3

    Now, when we use nslookup to query your domain:

    > lserver ns2.granitecanyon.com
    Default Server: ns2.granitecanyon.com
    Address: 204.1.217.148

    > suryag-corp.com
    Server: ns2.granitecanyon.com
    Address: 204.1.217.148

    Non-authoritative answer:
    suryag-corp.com nameserver = NS1.GRANITECANYON.com
    suryag-corp.com nameserver = NS2.GRANITECANYON.com

    Authoritative answers can be found from:
    suryag-corp.com nameserver = NS1.GRANITECANYON.com
    suryag-corp.com nameserver = NS2.GRANITECANYON.com
    NS1.GRANITECANYON.com internet address = 205.166.226.38
    NS2.GRANITECANYON.com internet address = 204.1.217.148

    It's replying as though it is not authoritative. I don't know why it's
    doing this - the root servers appear to agree that it should be
    authoritative, but something isn't right. Given that their ns1 server seesm
    to be down or unreachable, one obvious possibility is that this is somehow
    interfering with getting your zone's authority properly loaded to ns2. This
    mught not reflect the most robust design practices, but stranger things have
    certainly happened.

    Then again, I'm not sure what's going on with these gtld-servers.net. Has
    it been that long since I went DNSpelunking that they've rearranged the
    furniture? Anyway, I don't think that's the problem: they do delegate,
    however offhandedly, to granitecanyon, and granitecanyon's reachable server
    is lame. You might best pursue this by communicating directly with
    granitecanyon, as it would appear to be an issue at their end.

    Uhm.... one last thought. Doesn't granitecanyon use a DNS-lint sort of a
    checker? Are you certain it accepted your RRs and didn't make any obscure
    complaints? Well, call it half a thought...
    -=-
    Linux Users Of Northern Illinois: General Discussion Mailing list.
    For unsubscription, archives, and announcements only see http://luni.org



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 19 2001 - 15:04:33 CST

  •