Error "Query section mismatch : got"

Matus UHLAR - fantomas uhlar at
Wed Aug 19 14:41:10 UTC 2020

>On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 7:42 AM Matus UHLAR - fantomas
><uhlar at> wrote:
>> again, why you query for
>> under normal circumstances there's no point of querying that name.

On 19.08.20 10:05, tale via bind-users wrote:
>Well yes and no.   While an individual user would typically not,
>resolvers sure will.  While trying to resolve
>, it will eventually get to

my question is why would anyone do this, as this apparently does not make

someone (vietel) illogically delegated whole /24 subnet to broken servers: 86400 IN      NS 86400 IN      NS has address is an alias for
... is an alias for

> Then it will need to resolve the canonical name, and a response like
>the original one that was shown will be clearly buggy.
>I say "possibly" because from my vantage, all three of
>ns{,1,2}, the authorities for
>, are giving fine answers right now (on
>udp; blocked on tcp).   This includes the originally reported problem

Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar at ;
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Fucking windows! Bring Bill Gates! (Southpark the movie)

More information about the bind-users mailing list