Problem with resolution
warren at kumari.net
Wed Dec 17 15:47:51 UTC 2014
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Baird, Josh <jbaird at follett.com> wrote:
> Does anyone see anything strange about the two hosts?
> My BIND 9.9.4 servers are unable to resolve these hosts, but I have older servers that can. I noticed that I am unable to resolve the two authoritative servers (ns1.500bucksaday.com/ns2.500bucksaday.com) from anywhere (http://pastebin.com/kHUYHqDc), yet I am still able to resolve the two above hosts from several locations.
Well, for one thing, 500bucksaday.com expired:
wkumari$ dig ns 500bucksaday.com | grep status
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 45755
Domain Name: 500BUCKSADAY.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://networksolutions.com
Name Server: NS11019.ZTOMY.COM
Name Server: NS21019.ZTOMY.COM
Updated Date: 29-nov-2014
Creation Date: 17-oct-2013
Expiration Date: 17-oct-2014
'parently 500 bucks a day wan't quite enough to pay for registration....
greattextbookgiveaway.com. 172800 IN NS ns1.epicadventure101.com.
wkumari$ dig +nostats www.ca.greattextbookgiveaway.com.
@ns1.epicadventure101.com. |grep -A100 'R SEC'
;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.ca.greattextbookgiveaway.com. 14400 IN CNAME ca.greattextbookgiveaway.com.
ca.greattextbookgiveaway.com. 14400 IN A 22.214.171.124
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
ca.greattextbookgiveaway.com. 86400 IN NS ns1.500bucksaday.com.
ca.greattextbookgiveaway.com. 86400 IN NS ns2.500bucksaday.com.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns1.500bucksaday.com. 14400 IN A 126.96.36.199
ns2.500bucksaday.com. 14400 IN A 188.8.131.52
Someone should go poke epicadventure101.com.
Also, the whole CNAME www.example to example still makes me sad - just saying...
> Dig from server that can resolve the hostnames: http://pastebin.com/CYWCMdLn
> Dig from server that cannot resolve the hostnames: http://pastebin.com/EepCFyh9
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users at lists.isc.org
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
More information about the bind-users