Re: Forward type "only" no longer working (possibly a regression)?

2018-10-01 Thread Kevin Darcy
One of the most useful initial steps in troubleshooting is to establish your ability to reproduce the error. So, I'd look at getting to the command-line of the originating resolver, if possible, and using a command-line tool like "dig" to generate queries towards the intended target and see if

Re: Forward type "only" no longer working (possibly a regression)?

2018-10-01 Thread Karol Babioch
Hi, Am 01.10.18 um 21:10 schrieb Karol Babioch: > Do you have any suggestion / recommendation what I can do to narrow the > problem down? I already tried to increase the tracing and enabled query > logging, but I couldn't get to the bottom of things. What else can I do > here? as an additional

Re: Forward type "only" no longer working (possibly a regression)?

2018-10-01 Thread Karol Babioch
Hi Kevin, thanks for your reply. Am 01.10.18 um 20:46 schrieb Kevin Darcy: > Removing "forward only" just masks the problem by telling the resolver > algorithm to fail over to iterative resolution when it encounters the > SERVFAIL. You are probably right, but at least it chooses the correct

Re: Forward type "only" no longer working (possibly a regression)?

2018-10-01 Thread Kevin Darcy
You need to get to the root cause of what's causing the SERVFAIL. Removing "forward only" just masks the problem by telling the resolver algorithm to fail over to iterative resolution when it encounters the SERVFAIL. So, sure, the query resolves, but probably not from the correct server, and

Re: BIND and UDP tuning

2018-10-01 Thread Shaun
Hi Alex, On Mon, 1 Oct 2018 12:51:46 -0400 Alex wrote: > I believe I said as many as 500 qps, but I believe that's wrong. It's > more like a sustained 200 q/s. One other thing you might double check is whether or not any consumer equipment (cable modem, router) has a firewall setting that

Re: BIND and UDP tuning

2018-10-01 Thread Alex
Hi, On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 9:58 AM Blake Hudson wrote: > > Alex wrote on 9/30/2018 7:27 PM: > > Hi, > > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 1:19 PM @lbutlr wrote: > >> On 30 Sep 2018, at 09:59, Alex wrote: > >>> It also tends to happen in bulk - there may be 25 SERVFAILs within the > >>> same second,

Re: BIND and UDP tuning

2018-10-01 Thread Alex
Hi, > > It also tends to happen in bulk - there may be 25 SERVFAILs within > > the same second, then nothing for another few minutes. > > Hmmm. If it isn't the modem and it isn't the BLs then it more or less > has to be the service, no? Yes, most likely, but I was looking for more definitive

Re: BIND and UDP tuning

2018-10-01 Thread Lee
On 9/30/18, Alex wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 1:19 PM @lbutlr wrote: >> >> On 30 Sep 2018, at 09:59, Alex wrote: >> > It also tends to happen in bulk - there may be 25 SERVFAILs within the >> > same second, then nothing for another few minutes. >> >> That really makes it seem like

Re: BIND and UDP tuning

2018-10-01 Thread Blake Hudson
Alex wrote on 9/30/2018 7:27 PM: Hi, On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 1:19 PM @lbutlr wrote: On 30 Sep 2018, at 09:59, Alex wrote: It also tends to happen in bulk - there may be 25 SERVFAILs within the same second, then nothing for another few minutes. That really makes it seem like either you

Re: BIND and UDP tuning

2018-10-01 Thread G.W. Haywood via bind-users
Hello again, On Mon, 1 Oct 2018, Alex wrote: > Are your requests being dropped by the service(s)? > > (Or: are you inadvertently abusing the said service(s)?) I don't believe so - often times a follow-up host query succeeds without issue. It's also failing for invaluement and spamhaus, both