I had kept my Queue Listen Pipes at the default of 4 for many years, But
ever since aggressively using the anti-spam filters I have seen that the
amount of time it takes to process an email (check it against 8 spam
databases) is taking an long time - sometimes is will be as long as ten
I have a user that is experiencing what some call a loop back issue. The
user receives email with out a problem and then one day he gets the same
email over and over again. Anywhere between 20 to 100's of the same email
delivered at the same time of day.
The first thing to do is check the
So I can't understand why DNSStuff can not see it?
Learn to use and trust basic tools, not some 3rd-party GUI. Even broken
nslookup as a query tool is more trustable than a huge web
application. dig is the best DNS query tool.
Len, enough with the digs at me (no pun intended G).
While it is
In april 28, 2004, I asked why Ipswitch removed the outbound rules tab. I tried to look for the link to the answer in the
archives, so you can see first hand the entire thread. But it seems that the
files for that date are gone in the archive.
Any way, here is the answer given by
There's no such thing as propagation delay in DNS, no matter how
many times unknowing, misleading people repeat the phrase DNS
propagation.
I seem to recall your involvement with these unknowing, misleading
people: http://www.menandmice.com/2000/2330_enterprise_bind.html. As
On Saturday, August 21, 2004, 15:48:22, Sanford Whiteman wrote:
...
Vis-a-vis authoritative servers, it refers to the pull replication
of zones, taking up to one refresh interval to take effect in toto
(barring use of NOTIFY).
Vis-a-vis the public Internet, it refers to the pull
Being a pessimist I usually plan for a worst case scenario of
refresh interval *plus* TTL even though my current providers
secondaries do pay attention to NOTIFYs.
I agree. I was just using the assumption here that the official
T-time of non-authoritative replication
Being a pessimist I usually plan for a worst case scenario of refresh
interval *plus* TTL even though my current providers secondaries do pay
attention to NOTIFYs.
The NOTIFY RFC goes back several years and has been the predominant mode of
zone refresh for as long, in all the major DNS
I seem to recall your involvement with these unknowing, misleading
people: http://www.menandmice.com/2000/2330_enterprise_bind.html. As
apparent via Google search, DNS propagation has widely understood
meaningsinbothpublic (non-authoritative) and private
(authoritative)
While it is indeed good to use and trust basic tools, it is very poor
manners to badmouth things without any evidence of a problem.
There was no bad mouthing, and no reference in my post to anything about
you. My recommendation was about not trusting complex (remote) GUI tools,
when simple
Whatever MM does has nothing to do with my post about
propagation.
Your world-renowned, subject-matter-expert employer uses the term you
decry as the choice of unknowing, misleading people. If you can't
stop them from using it, you obviously can't expect less expert people
to
On Saturday, August 21, 2004, 16:58:18, Len Conrad wrote:
Being a pessimist I usually plan for a worst case scenario of refresh
interval *plus* TTL even though my current providers secondaries do pay
attention to NOTIFYs.
The NOTIFY RFC goes back several years and has been the predominant
While it is indeed good to use and trust basic tools, it is very poor
manners to badmouth things without any evidence of a problem.
There was no bad mouthing, and no reference in my post to anything about
you. My recommendation was about not trusting complex (remote) GUI
tools, when simple
R. Scott Perry wrote:
So if you think nslookup is broken, let us know why. If you think
www.dnsstuff.com -- probably the most trusted DNS site on the Internet
-- is not completely trustable, say why. And before you say it, the
DNS report portion misleads people into thinking small problems
Sanford Whiteman wrote:
Your presentation of how propagation is used in common parlance is
incomplete. It is widely used to describe replication delays for both
zone transfers and cached records. We hear it used equally in
reference to A, MX, and NS records. You can verify this
The word is used liberaly all over the place. Make a DNS change and
listen to your registrar and/or your ISP tell you that the changes
may take 24-72 hours for propagation to take place.
I don't think you meant to address this reply to me, didja? Yours are
my points as well: that the
Sanford Whiteman wrote:
The word is used liberaly all over the place. Make a DNS change and
listen to your registrar and/or your ISP tell you that the changes
may take 24-72 hours for propagation to take place.
I don't think you meant to address this reply to me, didja? Yours are
my points
On Saturday, August 21, 2004, 21:03:04, Sanford Whiteman wrote:
...
Len's point to the contrary is that, if (mis)taken at its dictionary,
non-IT meaning, propagation is a myth--since it would then imply an
outgoing, push broadcast from the domain/record owner--and so using
the term
- Original Message -
From: Rod Dorman
IMHO propagation is the wrong term altogether irregardless of what
definition one attributes to it. The real question is When will all the
incorrect cached values die off?
Okay, just to poke a little fun at this whole thread (from American
On Saturday 21 August 2004 10:35 pm, Bill Landry wrote:
Its reputation has not risen over
the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use
regardless instead.
I ain't gonna! Now, excuse me while I go unthaw some chicken. *grin*
Brian
To Unsubscribe:
I'm still not sure why you recommend not trusting complex (remote) GUI
tools.
simpler is always better. Simpler and LOCAL to my machine is best.
Complex (remote) GUI tools (what most people just call web tools) have
one significant advantage over simple (local) tools -- they avoid local
On Saturday, August 21, 2004, 10:35:51 PM, Bill wrote:
snip/
BL Okay, just to poke a little fun at this whole thread (from American Heritage
BL www.bartleby.com www.dictionary.com):
BL Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be
BL correct usage in formal style, when
22 matches
Mail list logo
