From: "Steven Levine" Received: from [192.168.100.201] (HELO mail.2rosenthals.com) by 2rosenthals.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.10) with ESMTPS id 7175447 for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Mon, 22 May 2023 20:08:09 -0400 Received: from secmgr-va.2rosenthals.com ([50.73.8.217]:37011 helo=mail2.2rosenthals.com) by mail.2rosenthals.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1q1FZN-000753-2i for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Mon, 22 May 2023 20:08:05 -0400 Received: from mta-102a.earthlink-vadesecure.net ([51.81.61.66]:58119) by mail2.2rosenthals.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1q1FZL-0000an-1Q for ecs-isp@2rosenthals.com; Mon, 22 May 2023 20:08:03 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; bh=KQKT0MPuOJRjPG4o3uwVO5Bxd2jUEM2KSuFHqe x/reQ=; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=earthlink.net; h=from:reply-to:subject: date:to:cc:resent-date:resent-from:resent-to:resent-cc:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post: list-owner:list-archive; q=dns/txt; s=dk12062016; t=1684800482; x=1685405282; b=nY4nzWaN5zmkfL3kqisJNQqn/ufg1sAq87vReY714Er+qND9NyhF4xb /6a8SCgJO1FTnsYILpWSSF8sO1WBDKnp8XeCfVy6el3o4JmUq2xGfPasf7wPQA6SSouAJYH Ayf0OSCJZ3Vktjv5M7GI5ZAXmd51Is8k6BEW8R8fpJCtKulVweobGOsmoMIwugKLqsSLLV6 syxtqcT7Qxyan7iUyHyAYK83qzGRJL1eGF5CveXNz0IArkwF+bYnqnm3jFZMjJIbgrz4a9e obe0c/7if/NuuaDUyEXGp2MldAr/3Py8z/Rxbsyj1PY5K9Y0InbX9wEHtnqVqXV7u/oIign uhQ== Received: from slamain ([108.193.252.151]) by vsel1nmtao02p.internal.vadesecure.com with ngmta id a6e5faa4-17619d1c73329eaf; Tue, 23 May 2023 00:08:01 +0000 Message-ID: <646bfccb.30.mr2ice.fgrirsq@earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 16:37:47 -0700 To: "eCS ISP Mailing List" In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [eCS-ISP] Odd dig behavior X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for OS/2 v3.00.11.24/60 In , on 05/22/23 at 12:02 PM, "Lewis G Rosenthal" said: Hi there, >This intrigued me, but I was otherwise occupied yesterday. I happens. :-) >{0}[j:\] dig -v >DiG 9.8.1-OS2-9.8.1-1.oc00 >{0}[j:\] dig +nssearch pmoylan.org >SOA ns1.wiz.net.au. dns.wiz.net.au. 2019030902 10800 3600 604800 300 from > server 203.30.197.11 in 213 ms. >SOA ns1.wiz.net.au. dns.wiz.net.au. 2019030902 10800 3600 604800 300 from > server 43.229.63.26 in 219 ms. That's good news. It could mean we have a minor porting nit. >(Yes, it's old, but it works.) Same here. I use 9.11.28 because it worked until now. >It should also be noted that: >dig pmoylan.org >returns data from my local DNS, though I can't rightly tell how long that > may have been cached. You can always use dig @8.8.8.8 pmoylan.org to bypass your cache, but the results won't differ. >Interesting hang. Definitely. It tells me no one has ever run dig v9.11.36 or v9.11.27. >Now, while pmoylan.org does not seem to have an A record or a CNAME (or >an AAAA), mail.pmoylan.org does have a CNAME record, and this is listed >as Peter's primary MX. (It is generally considered not good practice to >have an MX record pointing to a CNAME rather than an A, but some systems >allow it.) mail.pmoylan.org seems to be a CNAME for pmoylan.duckdns.org. >Likewise, ftp.pmoylan.org is another CNAME for the same host. Peter's situation is unusual. I appears that duckdns's name servers are the authority for mail.pmoylan.org and wiz.net.au is the authoriy for pmoylan.org. At least that what dig soa is telling me. >Without seeing a dump of his zonefile, Peter is not running bind yet. These responses are coming from his ISP's and duckdns's name servers. Steven -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Steven Levine" Warp/DIY/BlueLion etc. www.scoug.com www.arcanoae.com www.warpcave.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------