Strange ns answers...

[Kevin Darcy]

Mark.Andrews at nominum.com wrote:

> >
> > Rodney Joffe wrote:
> >
> > > Kevin Darcy wrote:
> > >What you showed before was an Additional section A record appea
> > ring, disappearing and
> > then re-appearing, even though the TTL was nowhere near expiration. *That* is
> >  bizarre. That implies
> > that the server deliberately omitted the A record on the second response even
> >  though it was still in
> > its cache. Why?
>
>         No.  It just didn't cache it in the first place.

Hmm... The TTL's imply that the A record in the 1st and 3rd responses came from
the same cache. Are you thinking that 4.2.2.1 is a non-caching forwarder (aka
"DNS proxy") which just happened to ask a different forwarder on the 2nd query,
i.e. one which didn't happen to have that particular record cached? I find that
quite plausible.


- Kevin