Re: is down, why no backup?

From: Peter Ajamian (
Date: 01/04/01

George Greer wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Peter Ajamian wrote:
> >George Greer wrote:
> >>
> >> The problem isn't the availability of a secondary server. The actual DNS
> >> file has:
> >>
> >>                         NS    
> >>                         NS    
> >>
> >Should've been able to get at least that when I did a ls -d in nslookup,
> >that timed out as well.
> Except network connectivity to the machine was dead so you can't access it.
>  10:34am  up 110 days, 14:26,  5 users,  load average: 0.06, 0.02, 0.00
Odd, though, that both nslookup and dig (in the part you snipped)
indicated that the server was found, they just timed out trying to get
an answer from it.

> If you query Cambot itself, you'll get the proper response. It appears
> nameservers will query Cambot for nameservers after the original
> (root|gtld)-server query times out.

Well, they only know to query other nameservers if they can get the ns
entry off of cambot, of course if cambot is working to return the ns
query, then they really don't need the other nameservers.  Kinda a catch
22.  Of course caching can play into the equation to make this partially
usefull, but it is no substitute for having the correct ns entries in
the root servers.

> I _do_ get requests for
> at
The only way I could possibly explain that is that servers which have
the ns entry cached from when it was prior working needed an A or CNAME
query.  Getting the NS entry from thier cache they were able to find the
secondary, not very reliable, though.

> In fact, this gtld-server has the right entry:
> dig ns
$dig ns

; <<>> DiG 8.2 <<>> ns
; Bad server: -- using default server and timer opts

It comes up as bad server.  Sure you didn't get the same message and
simply missed it (thereby getting the entry from localhost which was
probably set as default)?

Have you been getting a lot of problems from Network Solutions?  I've
been changing my domains over from them to other registrars who are less
than half the cost and appear to give me better support.  Last time I
tried to reach Network Solutions by phone I eventually gave up and thier
web interface never seems to work right.  I guess they figure that thier
name gives them the right to overcharge for crappy service, oh well, you
can always switch.

Regards, Peter

   | FAQ: |
   | Archives: |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/03/01 PST