Re: Configuration advice for a post-8020 world

2017-02-12 Thread Mark Andrews

Named does not check that a parent zone has NS records for a child
zone on the same server.  Always add delegating NS records.

As for ENT returning NXDOMAIN.  Early versions of the specifications
of DNSSEC said there were no NAMES, rather than NAMES with RECORDS,
between names in a DNSSEC sorted zone.  This changed the behaviour
of ENTs from NODATA to NXDOMAIN.  Versions of named which supported
this specification of DNSSEC return NXDOMAIN rather than NODATA for
ENT.

It took a while to get the IETF working group to update to specification
to restore ENT.

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
___
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: Configuration advice for a post-8020 world

2017-02-12 Thread Woodworth, John R

> -Original Message-
> From: Woodworth, John R
> -Original Message-
> From: bind-users [mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Phil 
> Mayers
> >
> > On 12/02/2017 11:09, Woodworth, John R wrote:
> >
> > > SAMPLE ZONES:
> > > 101{redacted}.com.  (REAL ZONE FILE)
> > > jwjw.sales.101{redacted}.com.   (REAL ZONE FILE)
> >
> > You are missing the glue NS records in the parent zone (just verified
> > by local test of the before/after case). You need:
> >
> > jwjw.sales.101{red}.com. IN NS ...
> >
> > ...in the "101{red}.com" zonefile. Yes, even if the same server has the 
> > child zone.
>
> Thanks Phil!
>
> I was really hoping it was something in my setup.  Guess I kind of thought 
> bind had
> been inferring these same-server delegations with some type of elfin magic 
> since
> they just work.
>
> I'll run some more tests this evening.
>


Phil,

Just ran a few more tests and it works without a hitch (even with an older
9.8 branch).  I should have tried this before assuming it wouldn't make a
difference.

Thanks for reminding me about assumptions :)


/John

>
> Thanks again,
> John
>
> > ___
> > 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
> >
> >
>

-- THESE ARE THE DROIDS TO WHOM I REFER:
This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain confidential 
or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in 
error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all 
copies of the communication and any attachments.

___
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: Quick Response Query for server-fail?

2017-02-12 Thread Mark Andrews

It looks like the domain has been abandoned.  You could complain
to domainab...@tucows.com to have NS records removed as the servers
don't answer for the domain anymore.

Domain Name: MAINCASTAD.COM
Domain ID: 2007206421_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.tucows.com
Registrar URL: http://tucowsdomains.com
Updated Date: 2016-05-28T11:37:04Z
Creation Date: 2016-02-28T05:16:55Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2017-02-28T05:16:55Z
Registrar: TUCOWS, INC.
Registrar IANA ID: 69
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: domainab...@tucows.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.4165350123
Domain Status: ok https://icann.org/epp#ok
Registry Registrant ID:
Registrant Name: Minjeong Na
Registrant Organization: NONE
Registrant Street: LA LA
Registrant City: LA
Registrant State/Province: LA
Registrant Postal Code: 12345
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.12345678
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax:
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email: naminjeong...@gmail.com
Registry Admin ID:
Admin Name: Minjeong Na
Admin Organization: NONE
Admin Street: LA LA
Admin City: LA
Admin State/Province: LA
Admin Postal Code: 12345
Admin Country: US
Admin Phone: +1.12345678
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax:
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email: naminjeong...@gmail.com
Registry Tech ID:
Tech Name: Minjeong Na
Tech Organization: NONE
Tech Street: LA LA
Tech City: LA
Tech State/Province: LA
Tech Postal Code: 12345
Tech Country: US
Tech Phone: +1.12345678
Tech Phone Ext:
Tech Fax:
Tech Fax Ext:
Tech Email: naminjeong...@gmail.com
Name Server: NS1.SITE4NOW.NET
Name Server: NS2.SITE4NOW.NET
Name Server: NS3.SITE4NOW.NET
DNSSEC: unsigned
URL of the ICANN WHOIS Data Problem Reporting System: http://wdprs.internic.net/
>>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2016-05-28T11:37:04Z <<<


In message <8020ad1a5ac147d09769f298aab71...@skt-tnetpmx2.skt.ad>, Sukmoon Lee 
writes:
> Hello.
>
> I found the slow response query at dns server. This query is server fail
> response.
> In reality, this query gets to response a server fail for foreign dns
> server.
>
> For example, maincastad.coms glue record has 3 name server, 5 ip address.
> All glue record dns is not response. So, this query responses to slow.
>
> Is it possible to cache and quick response like ncache(negative cache)?
> Thanks.
>
>
> $ dig @b.gtld-servers.net maincastad.com
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.9.9-P5 <<>> @b.gtld-servers.net maincastad.com
> ; (2 servers found)
> ;; global options: +cmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 38238
> ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 5
> ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
>
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;maincastad.com.IN  A
>
> ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> maincastad.com. 172800  IN  NS  ns1.site4now.net.
> maincastad.com. 172800  IN  NS  ns2.site4now.net.
> maincastad.com. 172800  IN  NS  ns3.site4now.net.
>
> ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> ns1.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   198.98.124.111
> ns1.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   72.26.101.2
> ns2.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   209.132.245.131
> ns2.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   23.89.199.119
> ns3.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   208.118.63.170
>
> ;; Query time: 5 msec
> ;; SERVER: 192.33.14.30#53(192.33.14.30)
> ;; WHEN: Mon Feb 13 08:54:22 KST 2017
> ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 178

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
___
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


Quick Response Query for server-fail?

2017-02-12 Thread Sukmoon Lee
Hello.

I found the slow response query at dns server. This query is server fail 
response.
In reality, this query gets to response a server fail for foreign dns server.

For example, maincastad.com’s glue record has 3 name server, 5 ip address.
All glue record dns is not response. So, this query responses to slow.

Is it possible to cache and quick response like ncache(negative cache)?
Thanks.


$ dig @b.gtld-servers.net maincastad.com

; <<>> DiG 9.9.9-P5 <<>> @b.gtld-servers.net maincastad.com
; (2 servers found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 38238
;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 5
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;maincastad.com.IN  A

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
maincastad.com. 172800  IN  NS  ns1.site4now.net.
maincastad.com. 172800  IN  NS  ns2.site4now.net.
maincastad.com. 172800  IN  NS  ns3.site4now.net.

;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns1.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   198.98.124.111
ns1.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   72.26.101.2
ns2.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   209.132.245.131
ns2.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   23.89.199.119
ns3.site4now.net.   172800  IN  A   208.118.63.170

;; Query time: 5 msec
;; SERVER: 192.33.14.30#53(192.33.14.30)
;; WHEN: Mon Feb 13 08:54:22 KST 2017
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 178
___
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: Configuration advice for a post-8020 world

2017-02-12 Thread Woodworth, John R

-Original Message-
From: bind-users [mailto:bind-users-boun...@lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Phil 
Mayers
>
> On 12/02/2017 11:09, Woodworth, John R wrote:
>
> > SAMPLE ZONES:
> > 101{redacted}.com.  (REAL ZONE FILE)
> > jwjw.sales.101{redacted}.com.   (REAL ZONE FILE)
>
> You are missing the glue NS records in the parent zone (just verified by
> local test of the before/after case). You need:
>
> jwjw.sales.101{red}.com. IN NS ...
>
> ...in the "101{red}.com" zonefile. Yes, even if the same server has the child 
> zone.

Thanks Phil!

I was really hoping it was something in my setup.  Guess I kind of thought bind 
had
been inferring these same-server delegations with some type of elfin magic since
they just work.

I'll run some more tests this evening.


Thanks again,
John

> ___
> 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
>
>


-- THESE ARE THE DROIDS TO WHOM I REFER:
This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain confidential 
or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in 
error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all 
copies of the communication and any attachments.

___
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: Configuration advice for a post-8020 world

2017-02-12 Thread Phil Mayers

On 12/02/2017 11:09, Woodworth, John R wrote:


SAMPLE ZONES:
101{redacted}.com.  (REAL ZONE FILE)
jwjw.sales.101{redacted}.com.   (REAL ZONE FILE)


You are missing the glue NS records in the parent zone (just verified by 
local test of the before/after case). You need:


jwjw.sales.101{red}.com. IN NS ...

...in the "101{red}.com" zonefile. Yes, even if the same server has the 
child zone.

___
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


Configuration advice for a post-8020 world

2017-02-12 Thread Woodworth, John R
All,

I am asking for advice/ comments/ best-practices for bind
configuration and zone RRs to avoid potential issues with
Empty Non-Terminal (ENT) domain names.

Before continuing, I feel I must point out I am a big fan
of improvements in network and protocol efficiency
including RFC-8020. I also feel the authors did an excellent
job of identifying potential critical regions and agree with
their cost-benefit analysis.

Having said that, I downloaded the latest bind (9.11.0-P3),
set up a couple sample zones and ran the test outlined below.

SAMPLE ZONES:
101{redacted}.com.  (REAL ZONE FILE)
jwjw.sales.101{redacted}.com.   (REAL ZONE FILE)

**
NOTE: This is not intended to be commentary on "blah blah bind's
**defective clairvoyance module blah blah blah" but rather
**how a zone/ bind admin can best prepare for this scenario
**

TESTING:
I ran a very simple test where I had 2 valid zones with an ENT
between them.  If I understand RFC-8020 correctly, they have
formalized the response of an ENT to RCODE=NOERROR and an empty
ANSWER section.

By querying the ENT "sales.101{redacted}.com." all descendants
(including the legitimate one "jwjw.sales.101{redacted}.com.")
would be effectively "cut" creating a temporary outage (Section 5).

My questions are:
  * Did I include an error/ use bad logic in the test itself?
  * Aside from stubbing out every ENT, what can be done to mitigate/
minimize this scenario?
  * Are there any features I am overlooking which could help in
this case?
  * For those with customers that cannot upgrade to latest bind,
how far back will these solutions work?  (9.2.3rc1 -- 9.4.0a0)?


TEST DETAILS:
--
#> dig @127.0.0.1 101{redacted}.com.

; <<>> DiG 9.11.0-P3 <<>> @127.0.0.1 101{redacted}.com.
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 47566
;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 5, ADDITIONAL: 6
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
...

--
#> dig @127.0.0.1 sales.101{redacted}.com.
; <<>> DiG 9.11.0-P3 <<>> @127.0.0.1 sales.101{redacted}.com.
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 2264
;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 1
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
...

--
#> dig @127.0.0.1 jwjw.sales.101{redacted}.com.
; <<>> DiG 9.11.0-P3 <<>> @127.0.0.1 jwjw.sales.101{redacted}.com.
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 25145
;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 5, ADDITIONAL: 6
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
...


Thanks,
John


-- THESE ARE THE DROIDS TO WHOM I REFER:
This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain confidential 
or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in 
error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all 
copies of the communication and any attachments.

___
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: RFC for SOA record for delegated subdomaain

2017-02-12 Thread Mark Andrews

In message <67724e80-a40d-25e4-aea4-c53fca8cf...@ies.etisalat.ae>, Abdul Khader
 writes:
> Dear All,
> 
> Is there any RFC which specifies that every delegated subdomain shall 
> have SOA record ?

Every zone has a SOA record.  This is specified in RFC 1034.
 
> Thanks and regards
> 
> Abdul Khader
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> ___
> 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
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
___
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


RFC for SOA record for delegated subdomaain

2017-02-12 Thread Abdul Khader

Dear All,

Is there any RFC which specifies that every delegated subdomain shall 
have SOA record ?




Thanks and regards

Abdul Khader


--

___
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