Re: query about EDNS UDP Packet

2012-12-31 Thread Sten Carlsen 
With the replies you have shown, the limitation is very likely within
your own walls.

While it is possible that some router on the path between you and the
test server limits the packet size, I would say it is very likely not
the case, much less than 1% propability - according to my experience.

I would use a sniffer along the path between each
switch/router/firewall/xx until you either don't see the longer edns0
packets or some other evidence (could be some ICMP message) shows you
that this is the place.

I would also search for keywords like: DNS EDNS0 truncate.

Good hunting.

On 31/12/12 15:07, Phil Mayers wrote:
> On 12/31/2012 10:54 AM, Gaurav Kansal wrote:
>> I just want to test whether this limit is within my organization.
>>
>> Is any method available by which I can check this?
>>
>
>
> https://www.dns-oarc.net/oarc/services/replysizetest
>
>
> ___
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
> unsubscribe from this list
>
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users@lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

-- 
Best regards

Sten Carlsen

No improvements come from shouting:
   "MALE BOVINE MANURE!!!"

___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Re: query about EDNS UDP Packet

2012-12-31 Thread Phil Mayers 

On 12/31/2012 10:54 AM, Gaurav Kansal wrote:

I just want to test whether this limit is within my organization.

Is any method available by which I can check this?




https://www.dns-oarc.net/oarc/services/replysizetest


___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Re: difference between default views in named_statistics.txt

2012-12-31 Thread benjamin fernandis 
Hi,


On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Gaurav Kansal  wrote:
> Hello Team,
>
>
>
> After enabling statistics-channel in bind conf file, I am getting the
> following O/P in the Incoming Request table:
>
>
>
> Incoming Requests
>
> QUERY  31553047
>
> NOTIFY 2994
>
> UPDATE   17896
>
>
>
> I just want to know whether the query count will set to ZERO after
> STOP/START named daemon or in case of system restart?
>
>
yes after stop/start/restart , counter will be reset to zero.

>
> Sorry to bother you guys but I can’t STOP/START the named service at my end.
> That’s why I am asking this question.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Gaurav Kansal
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: bind-users-bounces+gaurav.kansal=nic...@lists.isc.org
> [mailto:bind-users-bounces+gaurav.kansal=nic...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of
> Alan Clegg
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:56 AM
> To: benjamin fernandis
> Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org
> Subject: Re: difference between default views in named_statistics.txt
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 27, 2012, at 1:05 PM, benjamin fernandis 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> cat /var/named/chroot/var/named/data/named_stats.txt
>
>
>
> While this may present what you want, I think you may be happier parsing the
> Statistics Channel...
>
>
>
> http://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/cur/9.9/doc/arm/Bv9ARM.ch06.html#statschannels
>
>
>
> While this points to the 9.9 ARM, but the statistics channel has existed
> since 9.5.
>
>
>
> AlanC
>
> --
>
> Alan Clegg | +1-919-355-8851 | a...@clegg.com
>
>
>
> ___
>
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
> unsubscribe from this list
>
>
>
> bind-users mailing list
>
> bind-users@lists.isc.org
>
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

RE: query about EDNS UDP Packet

2012-12-31 Thread Gaurav Kansal 
I just want to test whether this limit is within my organization.

Is any method available by which I can check this?

 

Regards,

Gaurav Kansal

 

From: bind-users-bounces+gaurav.kansal=nic...@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-bounces+gaurav.kansal=nic...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of
Sten Carlsen
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 4:02 PM
To: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: query about EDNS UDP Packet

 

It means that something in your path limits packet size. That could likely
be a firewall or router with a "helpful" function to pass DNS packets on;
only it thinks that a DNS packet can only be 512 bytes long.

On 31/12/12 10:49, Gaurav Kansal wrote:

Hello Team,

 

I am getting too many entries for reducing the EDNS Packet size to 512 bytes
in my log file.

For Eg:

 

Dec 31 03:07:20 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving 'dns1.vps.net/A' (in
'vps.net'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:21 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ad.metanetwork.com/A' (in 'metanetwork.com'?) after reducing the advertised
EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:25 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'geo.admetanetwork.com/A' (in 'admetanetwork.com'?) after reducing the
advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:31 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'tomcat.apache.org/A' (in 'apache.org'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:31 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving 'www.apache.org/A'
(in 'apache.org'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512
octets

Dec 31 03:07:31 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'issues.apache.org/A' (in 'apache.org'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns1.zurich.surf.net/A' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns2.surfnet.nl/' (in 'surfnet.nl'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving 'ns2.surfnet.nl/A'
(in 'surfnet.nl'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512
octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns1.zurich.surf.net/' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised
EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving './NS' (in '.'?)
after reducing the advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:40 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns1.zurich.surf.net/A' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:40 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns1.zurich.surf.net/' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised
EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

 

On googling for this, I got to know that this come when remote DNS Server
doesn't support EDNS0 (i.e., packet size upto 4096 bytes).

 

Now I want to know whether my DNS Server supports EDNS0 for incoming request
or not.

I use the 'OARC's DNS Reply Size Test Server' for the same and I got the
below mentioned O/P:

 

#dig +short rs.dns-oarc.net txt

rst.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.

rst.x450.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.

rst.x490.x450.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.

"Tested at 2012-12-31 09:40:11 UTC"

"164.100.1.206 sent EDNS buffer size 4096"

"164.100.1.206 DNS reply size limit is at least 490"

 

Does this mean that my server is not supporting EDNS0 ???

 

 

Thanks and Regards,

Gaurav Kansal

Mob - 9910118448

 

Happy New Year 2013.

IPv4 is Over,

Are your ready for new Network.

 






___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
unsubscribe from this list
 
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users





-- 
Best regards
 
Sten Carlsen
 
No improvements come from shouting:
   "MALE BOVINE MANURE!!!"
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

Re: query about EDNS UDP Packet

2012-12-31 Thread Sten Carlsen 
It means that something in your path limits packet size. That could
likely be a firewall or router with a "helpful" function to pass DNS
packets on; only it thinks that a DNS packet can only be 512 bytes long.

On 31/12/12 10:49, Gaurav Kansal wrote:
>
> Hello Team,
>
>  
>
> I am getting too many entries for reducing the EDNS Packet size to 512
> bytes in my log file.
>
> For Eg:
>
>  
>
> Dec 31 03:07:20 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'dns1.vps.net/A' (in 'vps.net'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
> UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:21 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'ad.metanetwork.com/A' (in 'metanetwork.com'?) after reducing the
> advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:25 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'geo.admetanetwork.com/A' (in 'admetanetwork.com'?) after reducing the
> advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:31 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'tomcat.apache.org/A' (in 'apache.org'?) after reducing the advertised
> EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:31 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'www.apache.org/A' (in 'apache.org'?) after reducing the advertised
> EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:31 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'issues.apache.org/A' (in 'apache.org'?) after reducing the advertised
> EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'ns1.zurich.surf.net/A' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised
> EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'ns2.surfnet.nl/' (in 'surfnet.nl'?) after reducing the advertised
> EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'ns2.surfnet.nl/A' (in 'surfnet.nl'?) after reducing the advertised
> EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'ns1.zurich.surf.net/' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the
> advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving './NS' (in
> '.'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:40 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'ns1.zurich.surf.net/A' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised
> EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
> Dec 31 03:07:40 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
> 'ns1.zurich.surf.net/' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the
> advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets
>
>  
>
> On googling for this, I got to know that this come when remote DNS
> Server doesn't support EDNS0 (i.e., packet size upto 4096 bytes).
>
>  
>
> Now I want to know whether my DNS Server supports EDNS0 for incoming
> request or not.
>
> I use the '*OARC's DNS Reply Size Test Server' *for the same and I got
> the below mentioned O/P:
>
>  
>
> #dig +short rs.dns-oarc.net txt
>
> rst.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.
>
> rst.x450.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.
>
> rst.x490.x450.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.
>
> "Tested at 2012-12-31 09:40:11 UTC"
>
> "164.100.1.206 sent EDNS buffer size 4096"
>
> "164.100.1.206 DNS reply size limit is at least 490"
>
>  
>
> Does this mean that my server is not supporting EDNS0 ???
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
> Gaurav Kansal
>
> Mob -- 9910118448
>
>  
>
> Happy New Year 2013.
>
> IPv4 is Over,
>
> Are your ready for new Network.
>
>  
>
>
>
> ___
> Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
> from this list
>
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users@lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

-- 
Best regards

Sten Carlsen

No improvements come from shouting:
   "MALE BOVINE MANURE!!!"

___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

query about EDNS UDP Packet

2012-12-31 Thread Gaurav Kansal 
Hello Team,

 

I am getting too many entries for reducing the EDNS Packet size to 512 bytes
in my log file.

For Eg:

 

Dec 31 03:07:20 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving 'dns1.vps.net/A' (in
'vps.net'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:21 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ad.metanetwork.com/A' (in 'metanetwork.com'?) after reducing the advertised
EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:25 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'geo.admetanetwork.com/A' (in 'admetanetwork.com'?) after reducing the
advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:31 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'tomcat.apache.org/A' (in 'apache.org'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:31 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving 'www.apache.org/A'
(in 'apache.org'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512
octets

Dec 31 03:07:31 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'issues.apache.org/A' (in 'apache.org'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns1.zurich.surf.net/A' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns2.surfnet.nl/' (in 'surfnet.nl'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving 'ns2.surfnet.nl/A'
(in 'surfnet.nl'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512
octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns1.zurich.surf.net/' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised
EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:34 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving './NS' (in '.'?)
after reducing the advertised EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:40 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns1.zurich.surf.net/A' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised EDNS
UDP packet size to 512 octets

Dec 31 03:07:40 IPv6-DNS named[3769]: success resolving
'ns1.zurich.surf.net/' (in 'surf.net'?) after reducing the advertised
EDNS UDP packet size to 512 octets

 

On googling for this, I got to know that this come when remote DNS Server
doesn't support EDNS0 (i.e., packet size upto 4096 bytes).

 

Now I want to know whether my DNS Server supports EDNS0 for incoming request
or not.

I use the 'OARC's DNS Reply Size Test Server' for the same and I got the
below mentioned O/P:

 

#dig +short rs.dns-oarc.net txt

rst.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.

rst.x450.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.

rst.x490.x450.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.

"Tested at 2012-12-31 09:40:11 UTC"

"164.100.1.206 sent EDNS buffer size 4096"

"164.100.1.206 DNS reply size limit is at least 490"

 

Does this mean that my server is not supporting EDNS0 ???

 

 

Thanks and Regards,

Gaurav Kansal

Mob - 9910118448

 

Happy New Year 2013.

IPv4 is Over,

Are your ready for new Network.

 

___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

RE: difference between default views in named_statistics.txt

2012-12-31 Thread Gaurav Kansal 
Hello Team,

 

After enabling statistics-channel in bind conf file, I am getting the
following O/P in the Incoming Request table:

 

Incoming Requests

QUERY  31553047

NOTIFY 2994

UPDATE   17896

 

I just want to know whether the query count will set to ZERO after
STOP/START named daemon or in case of system restart?

 

Sorry to bother you guys but I can't STOP/START the named service at my end.
That's why I am asking this question.

 

 

 

 

Regards,

Gaurav Kansal

 

 

-Original Message-
From: bind-users-bounces+gaurav.kansal=nic...@lists.isc.org
[mailto:bind-users-bounces+gaurav.kansal=nic...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of
Alan Clegg
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 5:56 AM
To: benjamin fernandis
Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: difference between default views in named_statistics.txt

 

 

On Dec 27, 2012, at 1:05 PM, benjamin fernandis <
 benjo11...@gmail.com> wrote:

 

> cat /var/named/chroot/var/named/data/named_stats.txt

 

While this may present what you want, I think you may be happier parsing the
Statistics Channel...

 

 

http://ftp.isc.org/isc/bind9/cur/9.9/doc/arm/Bv9ARM.ch06.html#statschannels

 

While this points to the 9.9 ARM, but the statistics channel has existed
since 9.5.

 

AlanC

-- 

Alan Clegg | +1-919-355-8851 |   a...@clegg.com

 

___

Please visit  
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this
list

 

bind-users mailing list

  bind-users@lists.isc.org

 
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users