[Unbound-users] Old or incorrect information returned?
Florian Weimer
fweimer at bfk.de
Fri Nov 6 12:54:49 UTC 2009
* Haw Loeung:
>> The domain is still hosted on nextgen.net, with the old zone contents,
>> including the old NS RRset.
>
> No, it should be as follows:
>
> ======
> $ dig +trace supre.com.au
> <snip>
> com.au. 259200 IN NS udns2.ausregistry.net.au.
> com.au. 259200 IN NS udns3.ausregistry.net.au.
> com.au. 259200 IN NS udns4.ausregistry.net.au.
> ;; Received 429 bytes from 2001:dc0:2001:a:4608::59#53(A1.AUDNS.NET.au) in 689 ms
>
> supre.com.au. 14400 IN NS ns1.hyperservers.com.au.
> supre.com.au. 14400 IN NS ns2.hyperservers.com.au.
> supre.com.au. 14400 IN NS ns1.cpanelhost.net.au.
> supre.com.au. 14400 IN NS ns2.cpanelhost.net.au.
> ;; Received 162 bytes from 211.29.133.32#53(audns.optus.net) in 3 ms
> ======
Yes, but if you ask the nextgen.net servers due to the existing cache
contents, you keep getting the information that the nextgen.net
servers are still authoritative, so it's not necessary to ask the
com.au servers for fresh data.
I don't know the industry consensus regarding appropriate resolver
here. Re-validating glue has obvious pros (it would help in your
scenario), but also cons (more load on large, delegation-centric
zones).
--
Florian Weimer <fweimer at bfk.de>
BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/
Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1
D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99
More information about the Unbound-users
mailing list