2 problems: "temporary name lookup failures" & updating TLD servers

Vinny Abello vinny at tellurian.com
Tue Jul 6 00:00:26 UTC 2004


At 07:08 PM 7/5/2004, Linda W. wrote:
>Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> >On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 11:32:25PM -0700, Linda W. <bind at tlinx.org> wrote
> >
> >
> >>I have b/c/e/g/n/o listed with their authoritative root servers
> >>
> >>
> >                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >                                       This means nothing. TLD have
> >                                      authoritative name servers,
> >                                      period.
> >
> >
>This is from the bind9 Configuration Reference:
>
>Stub zones can be used to eliminate the need for glue NS record in a
>parent zone at the expense of maintaining a stub zone entry and a set of
>name server addresses in named.conf. This usage is not recommended for
>new configurations, and BIND 9 supports it only in a limited way. In
>BIND 4/8, zone transfers of a parent zone included the NS records from
>stub children of that zone. ...
>------
>     As noted above, it was not uncommon for those who used bind4 and
>bind8 to eliminate the need for some glue records by keeping addresses
>locally.  They were _FIXED_ and there were only 4 main TLD's: edu, org,
>gov and com.  It wasn't that complicated to
>throw in the TLD NS address records into a config file.
>---
>     If you've been running bind for 10 years you would know that
>---
>     Ok, so maybe it as more than 10 years....:-)

Hmm... I honestly never heard of this style of setup myself and *I* have 
been running BIND since 4.x as well about ten years ago. Never needed to do 
this and things were always fast and worked well for me. (Note I'm not the 
person that replied to you originally or ever in this thread).

> >>am now able to resolve gov addresses.
> >>
> >>
> >Wonderful: a lot of work to do something that any nameserver on the
> >planet does without hassles.
> >
> >
>Your sarcasm is unuseful, though your advice may be.
>The manual says it isn't recommended for new installations.  Mine isn't
>new --
>and I likely won't use stub zones for the TLD's in the future as was common
>practice -- something born out as being common even in bind8 setups.

Like I mentioned earlier, I myself never saw this in any example 
configuration or working name server that I came across in the past ten 
years... That's just me though. Maybe it was common, although I personally 
don't see the need for it unless you have a modem speed Internet connection.

> >>Wouldn't you want name resolution to be generally as fast as
> >>possible?
> >>
> >>
> >I want the system to work. I pity your users.
> >
> >
>     Sigh.  It WAS working.  It just started having problems last week.
>It's worked for many years.  I asked for people's shared experiences
>with current practice because
>changing standards and practice was beginning to make the old way not
>work so well.

I'm just curious... Do you have a document or reference where this was 
illustrated as a standard configuration or setup back in the day?

>However, once it is working, I still want it to work "well".  If I could
>just
>download 1 10 meg file every morning and have 90% of my name lookups be
>local all
>day it would be WAY worth it.  It's all the small lookups and
>transactions that
>slow things down.  If bulked up and xferred all at once, I could likely
>save tons of
>wait time for setting up, waiting on network and server latency and
>tear-down if I
>could spend a minute downloading a large file every morning....

Really?? What speed Internet connection do you have? I used to run BIND 4.x 
over 64k or 128k ISDN and it was plenty fast and left tons of room for 
other operations. The number of queries wasn't exorbitant, but once 
something was looked up, it was cached for at least a while (as most 
records still are) so you're looking at doing a lookup for a handful of 
records and caching it for a day or so instead of downloading 10MB of data 
every morning over your (I'm assuming very slow) Internet connection to 
have data that's probably not used for anything.

>Thanks for your help despite the 'tude.
>-l

I myself am not trying to exhibit any sort of 'tude towards you. :) I'm 
mostly just interested in knowing the history of your setup and where it 
originated as I had not crossed it before in my travels. I would definitely 
also recommend removing all of that configuration and let BIND do it's job 
though.

Vinny Abello
Network Engineer
Server Management
vinny at tellurian.com
(973)300-9211 x 125
(973)940-6125 (Direct)
PGP Key Fingerprint: 3BC5 9A48 FC78 03D3 82E0  E935 5325 FBCB 0100 977A

Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection
http://www.tellurian.com (888)TELLURIAN

There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who understand binary and 
those that don't.



More information about the bind-users mailing list