[TAG] freeshell.org service outage

[Jay R. Ashworth]

On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 02:27:38PM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Jay R. Ashworth (jra at baylink.com):
> > Two nameservers is indeed a bit thin... but on the other point, unless
> > my understand of DNS is also thin, the parent nameserver is *always*
> > going to hand you the glue, is it not?
> 
> It's going to hand you the glue records if it _has_ them.   One of the
> reasons I like the "DNS Report" test at http://www.dnsreport.com/ is
> that it shows you, by implication, the immense variety of ways to screw
> up one's DNS -- and one of them is to have missing or incorrect glue
> records in the parent zone.  Recommended facility, anyway.

And in return, nice tip.  :-)

*Very* cool site.  I wonder if he has a version that returns something
more easily parseable, by, say, Nagios.  Or, alternatively, will make
his script available.  Must look closer.

> > I was a touch surprised, though that you didn't demonstrate the
> > handy-dandy "+trace+ option to dig, which I fell in love with the
> > minute I found it:
> 
> Neat.  Here's the result for linuxgazette.net:
> 
>   [rick at linuxmafia]
>   ~ $ dig -t mx linuxgazette.net +trace
> 
>   ; <<>> DiG 9.2.4 <<>> -t mx linuxgazette.net +trace
>   ;; global options:  printcmd
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      J.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      K.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      L.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      M.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   .                       169818  IN      NS      E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET.
>   ;; Received 436 bytes from 198.144.192.2#53(198.144.192.2) in 19 ms
> 
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      J.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      K.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      L.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      M.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      A.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      B.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      C.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      D.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      E.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      F.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      G.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      H.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   net.                    172800  IN      NS      I.GTLD-SERVERS.net.
>   ;; Received 503 bytes from 192.5.5.241#53(F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET) in 24 ms
> 
>   linuxgazette.net.       172800  IN      NS      ns1.genetikayos.com.
>   linuxgazette.net.       172800  IN      NS      ns1.linuxmafia.com.
>   ;; Received 128 bytes from 192.48.79.30#53(J.GTLD-SERVERS.net) in 131 ms
> 
>   linuxgazette.net.       86400   IN      MX      10 genetikayos.com.
>   linuxgazette.net.       86400   IN      NS      ns1.linuxmafia.com.
>   linuxgazette.net.       86400   IN      NS      ns1.genetikayos.com.
>   ;; Received 112 bytes from 64.246.26.120#53(ns1.genetikayos.com) in 66 ms
> 
>   [rick at linuxmafia]
>   ~ $
> 
> I haven't done nearly enough playing around with new DNS tools:  I'm one
> of those codgers who've been hanging onto nslookup and sulking about its 
> ongoing demise.  Thank you for pointing out that trick!

I'm trying to figure out a reasonable way to automate running it and
looking for changes; it's not quite tuned for that.  Perhaps the
dnsreport code would be easier to use that way.

> > But it appears still not to be running; perhaps the gent gave up?
> 
> Looks like he had a one-day outage, and is back.

Well, good.  We don't need that sort of service *much* anymore, but
those that need it... need it.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

      If you can read this... thank a system administrator.  Or two.  --me