no NS but having A record

[Kal Feher]

The zone appears to be configured incorrectly. That is why your results and
Scott's are so odd. I'll explain below, but in summary, the name servers to
which the zone is delegated have what appears to be rubbish records.
Specifically these:

gdpu.cn.                3600    IN      NS      gdpu.cn.
gdpu.cn.                3600    IN      NS      dns4.dmz.local.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
gdpu.cn.                3600    IN      A       219.136.229.43
dns4.dmz.local.         3600    IN      A       10.55.11.11

I'll explain in a little more detail...

First check the delegation:
(I've reduced the output for the sake of readability)

arapahoe:~ kfeher$ dig ns cn +short
a.dns.cn.
ns.cernet.net.
b.dns.cn.
d.dns.cn.
c.dns.cn.
e.dns.cn.

Then query one of those servers for the domains NS record:
arapahoe:~ kfeher$ dig ns gdpu.cn @D.DNS.cn

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
gdpu.cn.                21600   IN      NS      dns1.gdpu.cn.
gdpu.cn.                21600   IN      NS      dns2.gdpu.cn.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
dns1.gdpu.cn.           21600   IN      A       219.136.229.41
dns2.gdpu.cn.           21600   IN      A       219.136.229.42


This is correct so far.

Lets see if the 2 name servers agree...
arapahoe:~ kfeher$ dig ns gdpu.cn @dns2.gdpu.cn

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;gdpu.cn.                       IN      NS

;; ANSWER SECTION:
gdpu.cn.                3600    IN      NS      gdpu.cn.
gdpu.cn.                3600    IN      NS      dns4.dmz.local.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
gdpu.cn.                3600    IN      A       219.136.229.43
dns4.dmz.local.         3600    IN      A       10.55.11.11

A 10.x.x.x address is an rfc1918 address and is either internal zone
information leaking to the outside world, or just plan wrong. In any case
you will not be able to query it. The other address does not respond to DNS
queries. I suspect this is in fact a webserver accidentally listed as a
nameserver.

Note that the reason your queries fail is because name servers are supposed
to assume that the apex of the zone contains the most correct data.
Therefore if the 2 name servers to which this zone is delegated respond with
rubbish, your resolver will cache that rubbish.

If you know the owner of that domain their name server should have these 2
records most likely:

gdpu.cn.                21600   IN      NS      dns1.gdpu.cn.
gdpu.cn.                21600   IN      NS      dns2.gdpu.cn.



On 11/5/09 12:57 PM, "Tech W." <techwww at yahoo.com.cn> wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> Firstly the DNS serveres for that domain is not mastered by me.
> I got the NS dig info as below.
> You can see, if I specify another public DNS (211.66.80.161), the results can
> be fetched. If I don't specify a DNS (use the default one 202.96.128.143 of my
> ISP), dig gets nothing.
> So I'm really confused on their configure.
> Please help again, thanks~
> 
> 
> # dig gdpu.cn ns  @211.66.80.161
> 
> ; <<>> DiG 9.5.0-P2 <<>> gdpu.cn ns @211.66.80.161
> ;; global options:  printcmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 57139
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 2
> 
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;gdpu.cn.                       IN      NS
> 
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> gdpu.cn.                21347   IN      NS      dns2.gdpu.cn.
> gdpu.cn.                21347   IN      NS      dns1.gdpu.cn.
> 
> ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> dns2.gdpu.cn.           21347   IN      A       219.136.229.42
> dns1.gdpu.cn.           21347   IN      A       219.136.229.41
> 
> ;; Query time: 3 msec
> ;; SERVER: 211.66.80.161#53(211.66.80.161)
> ;; WHEN: Mon May 11 18:51:19 2009
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 95
> 
> 
> # dig gdpu.cn ns 
> 
> ; <<>> DiG 9.5.0-P2 <<>> gdpu.cn ns
> ;; global options:  printcmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 15877
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
> 
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;gdpu.cn.                       IN      NS
> 
> ;; Query time: 1 msec
> ;; SERVER: 202.96.128.143#53(202.96.128.143)
> ;; WHEN: Mon May 11 18:51:24 2009
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 25
> 
> --- On Mon, 11/5/09, Scott Haneda <talklists at newgeo.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I do not think you can have a .local NS.  Both of
>> those NS's have to be reachable by the outside world, and
>> .local is not. It may be on your local lan, but outside
>> that, it will not be.
> 
> 
> 
>       
> _______________________________________________
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

-- 
Kal Feher