[52444] in North American Network Operators' Group

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post

Re: Re: Root DNS Server Issues?

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Neiberger)
Tue Oct 1 20:08:30 2002

Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 20:07:57 -0400
To: "John M. Brown" <john@chagresventures.com>
From: John Neiberger <neiby@ureach.com>
Reply-To: <neiby@ureach.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu


Forgive me for being a DNS clunkhead.  <g>  I honestly don't 
know much about it, but I thought I'd post this to the list 
because it did appear to be a problem with the root servers, 
which would be A Bad Thing (tm).

Probable dumb question:  if I do an nslookup from a desktop 
directed at a root server, should the name eventually resolve?  
Or, is a request to a root server from our DNS server a 
different kind of request?  I have a feeling it is and that I'm 
barking up the wrong tree.

That might explain why an nslookup directed at someone else's 
name server is working. 

Still, that would lead us back to the original problem.  Our 
DNS server can't communicate with the root servers.  Hmm..

Again, I apologize for being a total noob at this.  I believe 
that I'm misunderstanding the symptoms and using the wrong 
tools to troubleshoot!

Thanks to all,
John

---- On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, John M. Brown 
(john@chagresventures.com) wrote:

> Root servers don't resolve names other than the TLD's.
> 
> OTW they don't have data for www.yahoo.com    only for  .com
> which will point you towards the gTLD servers (listed below)
> which will point you towards Yahoo's name servers.
> 
> What names are you trying to lookup ?
> 
> John Brown
> Le Geek
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 07:46:00PM -0400, John Neiberger 
wrote:
> > We're getting responses from the root servers, the names 
just 
> > aren't resolving.  From a windows NT machine the error 
is "Non-
> > existent Domain".  
> > 
> > Ah, I just noticed something.  The packet length for the 
DNS 
> > response is supposed to be 510 bytes but it's being 
truncated 
> > to 128.  What the heck would cause that??  
> > 
> > John
> > 
> > ---- On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, John M. Brown 
> > (john@chagresventures.com) wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Here is for L, F also seems to reply.  Tested from 8 
different
> > > places on the net.  OTW Transit splay on the test was 8 
> > different
> > > providers.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Can you give a sample of the "errors" you are seeing?
> > > 
> > > Got a sample DIG line ??
> > > 
> > > John Brown
> > > Le Geek
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > %dig @l.root-servers.net com ns
> > >  
> > > ; <<>> DiG 8.3 <<>> @l.root-servers.net com ns
> > > ; (1 server found)
> > > ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
> > > ;; got answer:
> > > ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6
> > > ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 13, AUTHORITY: 0, 
> > ADDITIONAL: 13
> > > ;; QUERY SECTION:
> > > ;;      com, type = NS, class = IN
> > >  
> > > ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        L.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        F.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        J.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        K.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        E.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        M.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        A.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        G.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        H.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        C.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        I.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        B.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > > com.                    2D IN NS        D.GTLD-
SERVERS.NET.
> > >  
> > > ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> > > L.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.41.162.30
> > > F.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.35.51.30
> > > J.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.48.79.30
> > > K.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.52.178.30
> > > E.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.12.94.30
> > > M.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.55.83.30
> > > A.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.5.6.30
> > > G.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.42.93.30
> > > H.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.54.112.30
> > > C.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.26.92.30
> > > I.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.43.172.30
> > > B.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.33.14.30
> > > D.GTLD-SERVERS.NET.     2D IN A         192.31.80.30
> > >  
> > > ;; Total query time: 89 msec
> > > ;; FROM: jedi.staff.chagres.net to SERVER: l.root-
> > servers.net  198.32.64.12
> > > ;; WHEN: Tue Oct  1 17:29:36 2002
> > > ;; MSG SIZE  sent: 21  rcvd: 453
> > >  
> > > %
> > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 07:08:37PM -0400, John Neiberger 
> > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > We seem to be getting name resolution errors when we 
query 
> > any 
> > > > of the root servers, and this just started a hour or so 
ago.
> > > > 
> > > > Anyone else noticing a problem?
> > > > 
> > > > John
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 


home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post