On 18/07/2019 23:08, Evgeniy Berdnikov via Exim-users wrote: > Quite puzzling... The only difference I see here is the presence of one > authority record in dns query from Exim, marked as [1au]. > Tcpdump man page states: > > A few anomalies are checked and may result in extra fields enclosed in > square brackets: If a query contains an answer, authority records or > additional records section, ancount, nscount, or arcount are printed as > `[na]', `[nn]' or `[nau]' where n is the appropriate count. > > Running tcpdump with -vvv shows that there is an authority record for root. > I don't know is this behaviour legal or not, and why this record is present > in exim queries. But I propose to try two other methods to resolve name: > > 1: exim4 -be '${lookup dnsdb{a=smtp.gmail.com}{$value}fail}' > > 2: perl -e '($n,$a,$t,$l,@ip)=gethostbyname("smtp.gmail.com"); print > "n=$n\na=$a\n"; for (@ip) {($w,$x,$y,$z)=unpack('W4',$_); print > "$w.$x.$y.$z\n"}' > > In my experiments 1st variant results in additional authority record, the > 2nd does not (as manual run of telnet). Does 1st variant fail when exim > fails to run transport?
Might there be a dnssec-related difference? Would that show in the text tcpdump output, or would you need to look carefully with wireshark? -- Cheers, Jeremy -- ## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/