As long as you're getting a SERVAIL you are having a problem with your
resolver. This assumption can be verified if you check with public resolvers
like 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 (dig -t mx surfacetreatment.be @8.8.8.8)
-- Yassine.
On Thursday, March 2, 2017 5:56 AM, Voytek <li...@sbt.net.au> wrote:
On Wed, March 1, 2017 10:45 pm, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 09:50:55PM +1100, Voytek wrote:
Andrew,
> Why are you setting +nocd?
ahmm, I saw it in Viktor's post, and, copied it..oops
> It looks like you're still seeing a SERVFAIL for the MX record, at
> least in what you posted. SERVFAIL means something is wrong, possibly with
> the resolver (also called "recursive" or "recursive server") itself.
> That's not the answer you need.
I found different name servers in an old resolv.conf, and, these seem to
resolve OK, I'll use these pending confirmation from hosting
now getting this[1]:
Andrew, Viktor, thanks for your help, much appreciated.
[1]
# dig -t mx surfacetreatment.be
; <<>> DiG 9.8.2rc1-RedHat-9.8.2-0.47.rc1.el6_8.4 <<>> -t mx
surfacetreatment.be
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 27982
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;surfacetreatment.be. IN MX
;; ANSWER SECTION:
surfacetreatment.be. 300 IN MX 10
remote.surfacetreatment.be.
;; Query time: 334 msec
;; SERVER: 103.15.178.250#53(103.15.178.250)
;; WHEN: Thu Mar 2 15:51:30 2017
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 60
