|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Re: Root DNS Server Issues?
Don't worry about being a DNS clunkhead. Though some on this list will banish you for trying to learn. The root servers are non-recursive. Otherwords they only answer for what they know. WHat you are asking for is a server to be recursive in its answer to your query. This is what a ISP"s server will do. What OS is your DNS server running ? If its a Unix version, then I could help via the phone if you would like. write me back privately with contact data. John Brown Le Geek On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 08:07:57PM -0400, John Neiberger wrote: > Forgive me for being a DNS clunkhead. <g> I honestly don't > know much about it, but I thought I'd post this to the list > because it did appear to be a problem with the root servers, > which would be A Bad Thing (tm). > > Probable dumb question: if I do an nslookup from a desktop > directed at a root server, should the name eventually resolve? > Or, is a request to a root server from our DNS server a > different kind of request? I have a feeling it is and that I'm > barking up the wrong tree. > > That might explain why an nslookup directed at someone else's > name server is working. > > Still, that would lead us back to the original problem. Our > DNS server can't communicate with the root servers. Hmm.. > > Again, I apologize for being a total noob at this. I believe > that I'm misunderstanding the symptoms and using the wrong > tools to troubleshoot! > > Thanks to all, > John > > ---- On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, John M. Brown > ([email protected]) wrote: > > > Root servers don't resolve names other than the TLD's. > > > > OTW they don't have data for www.yahoo.com only for .com > > which will point you towards the gTLD servers (listed below) > > which will point you towards Yahoo's name servers. > > > > What names are you trying to lookup ? > > > > John Brown > > Le Geek > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 07:46:00PM -0400, John Neiberger > wrote: > > > We're getting responses from the root servers, the names > just > > > aren't resolving. From a windows NT machine the error > is "Non- > > > existent Domain". > > > > > > Ah, I just noticed something. The packet length for the > DNS > > > response is supposed to be 510 bytes but it's being > truncated > > > to 128. What the heck would cause that?? > > > > > > John > > > > > > ---- On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, John M. Brown > > > ([email protected]) wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is for L, F also seems to reply. Tested from 8 > different > > > > places on the net. OTW Transit splay on the test was 8 > > > different > > > > providers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you give a sample of the "errors" you are seeing? > > > > > > > > Got a sample DIG line ?? > > > > > > > > John Brown > > > > Le Geek > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > %dig @l.root-servers.net com ns > > > > > > > > ; <<>> DiG 8.3 <<>> @l.root-servers.net com ns > > > > ; (1 server found) > > > > ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch > > > > ;; got answer: > > > > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6 > > > > ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 13, AUTHORITY: 0, > > > ADDITIONAL: 13 > > > > ;; QUERY SECTION: > > > > ;; com, type = NS, class = IN > > > > > > > > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > > > > com. 2D IN NS L.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS F.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS J.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS K.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS E.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS M.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS A.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS G.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS H.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS C.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS I.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS B.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > com. 2D IN NS D.GTLD- > SERVERS.NET. > > > > > > > > ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: > > > > L.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.41.162.30 > > > > F.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.35.51.30 > > > > J.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.48.79.30 > > > > K.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.52.178.30 > > > > E.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.12.94.30 > > > > M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.55.83.30 > > > > A.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.5.6.30 > > > > G.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.42.93.30 > > > > H.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.54.112.30 > > > > C.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.26.92.30 > > > > I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.43.172.30 > > > > B.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.33.14.30 > > > > D.GTLD-SERVERS.NET. 2D IN A 192.31.80.30 > > > > > > > > ;; Total query time: 89 msec > > > > ;; FROM: jedi.staff.chagres.net to SERVER: l.root- > > > servers.net 198.32.64.12 > > > > ;; WHEN: Tue Oct 1 17:29:36 2002 > > > > ;; MSG SIZE sent: 21 rcvd: 453 > > > > > > > > % > > > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 07:08:37PM -0400, John Neiberger > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > We seem to be getting name resolution errors when we > query > > > any > > > > > of the root servers, and this just started a hour or so > ago. > > > > > > > > > > Anyone else noticing a problem? > > > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
|