"No A record found for edtweb12"
coumie at gmail.com
Thu Jun 12 17:19:05 UTC 2008
That's my suggestion too, but my client said that he's already got
time/effort/etc invested in this host. I agree, if one thing is wrong,
then who knows what else is wrong. IF I can get them to fix this, then
it might be ok, and we just move on. IF it's fixed, but then there are
other problems, then a move would be best. Same with if they won't/
don't fix it.
So, as far as validating my sleuthing skills, can anyone give me a yea
or nay? Is the secondary NS record misconfigured?
On Jun 12, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Blaine Fleming wrote:
> Michael Coumerilh wrote:
>> He asked his host about this, and they basically said, "It's not
>> misconfigured, and NS23 and NS24 are the same computer anyway, so it
>> wouldn't matter." It seems to me that the secondary NS
>> (ns24.empiredatatech.com) is where the problem lies. My theory is
>> once the local DNS server requests the page, if it returns the
>> secondary NS it will fail. If, however it returns the primary server
>> it comes up as usual.
>> Can someone please help confirm this?
> ns23.empiredatatech.com timed out repeatedly on me but both seemed to
> return the same responses. These guys have some ugly mistakes in
> zones and the fact that both nameservers are the same computer scares
> me. I'm betting they won't care if you ask them to fix it so I really
> recommend moving the hosting or at least the DNS. Of course, that's
> just my opinion.
More information about the bind-users