Re: Very long delays, is it just djbdns?

On 13 Nov 2010, at 19:56, Chris Pugh wrote:
> On 13 November 2010 08:19, Sabahattin Gucukoglu
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Try this command from a nice, clean dnscache:
>> host -v 2001:470:1f09:103e::2354
>=20
> host -v ??   Don't you mean..
>=20
>   dnsqr any 2001:470:1f09:103e::2354
>=20
> and/or it's equivalent?

Nope, that would just query the root for the FQDN with that literal =
form.  To use dnsqr it would be:
dnsqr ptr =
4.5.3.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.e.3.0.1.9.0.f.1.7.7.4.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa

> It took me three tries on my fastest, most well-connected machine to =
get the >NXDOMAIN response.  I haven't got to the bottom of it yet, but =
if anybody has a >clue, please do share!
>=20
> No issue from here -  an immediate response was received, e.g.
>=20
> 15 2001\072470\0721f09\072103e\072\0722354:
> 117 bytes, 1+0+1+0 records, response, nxdomain
> query: 15 2001\072470\0721f09\072103e\072\0722354
> authority: . 10708 SOA a.root-servers.net nstld.verisign-grs.com
> 2010111300 1800 900 604800 86400
>=20
> ( and that's from a very slow and essentially low spec machine ).

Yeah, please try the above.

I have taken a look at the dnscache logs for these queries, it finishes =
up with "drop input/output error" which means my queries are being =
dropped, but I can't get much more than that.  Tracing the delegations =
up from the roots seem to work fine (except dnscache's "Lame" notation =
is a bit different from BIND, but that's okay).

As a side note, I do not consider the need for separate log-reading =
programs to be anything but the sign of a seriously disturbed mind.  =
It's entirely possible to make machine-parseable logfiles without using =
the psychedelic notation Dan chose so they'd still be readable by less =
disturbed individuals.  (OTOH: the use of separate programs for =
capturing and timestamping those logs is genius.)

Cheers,
Sabahattin