On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Davide Libenzi wrote: > On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Bart Mortelmans wrote: > > > This actually is a situation we see rather often: a domain name having one > > or > > more lame nameservers like this one (not responding, or responding with an > > authority section refering to the TLD root-servers) but actually still > > working > > (more or less) because at least one nameserver isn't lame. > > > > The response of sdns1.ovh.net for secca-expertise.com doesn't have the > > authoritative flag set. That's most probably the part that triggers other > > DNS > > software to look further, on to the next nameserver. I will however warn > > that, > > some other nameservers might return valid information which you would prefer > > to take into account, withou setting the authoritative flag. So just > > skipping > > any NS that doesn't set that flag would be a bad idea. > > > > Maybe skipping those that neither have an answer section (this one only > > returned an authority sections, which many nameservers do if you ask them > > something they know nothing about), nor have the authoritative flag set, > > could > > be a hint to move on to the next one? > > This should be fixed now. I'll make another 1.27 pre-release this weekend ...
Actually, after some consideration, I decided NOT to fix that problem. That is a totally lame DNS configuration, where an inner NS give an authority response bouncing back WRT the current resolve chain. Even `dig`, when run in trace mode (recursive descendent - like XMail), fails many times with a 'BAD REFERRAL' error code. As far as I'm concerned, the secca-expertise.com domain (and its IT admins) can go to hell. - Davide _______________________________________________ xmail mailing list xmail@xmailserver.org http://xmailserver.org/mailman/listinfo/xmail
