Timeout semantics of Unbound differ radically from Bind 9
p.mayers at imperial.ac.uk
Mon Apr 11 10:08:04 UTC 2016
On 10/04/16 21:28, Dhalgren Tor via Unbound-users wrote:
> If you see anything mistaken in any of the above please let me know.
I can't comment on the unbound/Tor specifics, but note that it's totally
possible to get bind into a state where it won't respond at all in the
cited time windows, if upstream connectivity is broken. I've seen this
on a number of occasions.
Am I correct in understanding that the Tor/eventdns code is,
effectively, self-DoS'ing by marking all of its nameservers dead for
increasingly long backoff times?
More information about the Unbound-users