Is lame servers an issue?

[Mark Andrews]

> "lame servers" are sorta like the mail that you receive at your new  
> home that are addressed to the previous home owner. Someone somewhere  
> out there thinks that your address is the best way to get ahold of  
> that person. When in reality, you have no way to do such a thing. And  
> in this case, some computer (theirs specifically, or one in between  
> you and them) is asking yours for directions. Your computer is logging  
> that, "Hey, someone lame (pun intended) just asked me about 1.2.3.4  
> thinking I was in charge of it. I just thought you'd like to know"
> 
> Mike

	Absolutely WRONG.  It's not about your servers.

	Lame servers are servers that have been delegated a zone
	but are not serving it.  If you want you can check the
	servers to see if they are still lame and contact the remote
	server operator to fix this.  If that request fails you can
	contact the parent zone operator and request that the
	delegation be pulled.  Often remote operators are not aware
	that a server is lame.

	If you don't feel like trying to get the situation fixed then
	you at least have some information about why your remote lookups
	are failing.

	If you don't care about either fixing or why then you can just
	stop logging the messages.

	Mark

> "Warn those who are idle, encourage the timid, help the weak, be  
> patient with everyone." - Paul - (1 Thessalonians 5:14)
> 
> On Jul 2, 2008, at 3:49 PM, Carlos Alberto Bernat Orozco wrote:
> 
> > Hi group
> >
> > Thanks for the fast answer.
> >
> > Yes, I put those lines and stop logging lame-servers.
> >
> > But I have another question. Is this process decreasing performance on
> > my server? yes I stopped the logging but is totally necesary the lame
> > servers?
> >
> > Thanks in advanced!
> >
> >
> >
> > 2008/7/2 Jeff Reasoner <jeff.reasoner at mail.hccanet.org>:
> >> Not an issue you can fix directly. Those domains are delegated to  
> >> hosts
> >> that are not properly configured nameservers, and named is logging  
> >> that.
> >>
> >> You could prevent them from being logged in bind 9.x.x with a logging
> >> statement in named.conf:
> >>
> >>
> >> logging {
> >>
> >>       channel null { null; };
> >>
> >>       category lame-servers { null; };
> >> }
> >>
> >> See the BIND ARM for all the gory logging details.
> >>
> >> On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 10:42 -0500, Carlos Alberto Bernat Orozco  
> >> wrote:
> >>> Hi group
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for my question question. I'm newbie.
> >>>
> >>> In my logs I see a lot of this messages
> >>>
> >>> named[3028]: lame server resolving 'adon.co.kr' (in 'adon.co.kr'?):
> >>> 211.234.93.201#53
> >>> named[3028]: lame server resolving 'core-distributions.com' (in
> >>> 'core-distributions.com'?): 80.85.91.14#53
> >>> named[3028]: lame server resolving 'core-distributions.com' (in
> >>> 'core-distributions.com'?): 80.85.91.15#53
> >>> named[3028]: lame server resolving 'eslcontractorshardware.com' (in
> >>> 'eslcontractorshardware.com'?): 75.127.110.43#53
> >>> named[3028]: lame server resolving 'eslcontractorshardware.com' (in
> >>> 'eslcontractorshardware.com'?): 75.127.110.2#53
> >>> named[3028]: lame server resolving 'web-display.com' (in
> >>> 'web-display.com'?): 67.15.81.33#53
> >>> named[3028]: lame server resolving 'web-display.com' (in
> >>> 'web-display.com'?): 67.15.80.3#53
> >>> named[3028]: lame server resolving 'core-distributions.com' (in
> >>> 'core-distributions.com'?): 80.85.91.15#53
> >>>
> >>> Is this an issue? can I block it? how can I block it?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks in advanced
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Jeff Reasoner
> >> HCCA
> >> 513 728-7902 voice
> >>
> >
> 
> 
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at isc.org