DIG root.hints update failure

[G. Roderick Singleton]

Jim Reid wrote:
> 
> >>>>> ">" == G Roderick Singleton <gsingleton at home.com> writes:
> 
>     >> There's probably no need to "update your root.hints file". That
>     >> file hasn't changed in years. And if you have an out of date
>     >> copy, the current version is available at:
>     >> ftp:ftp.rs.internic.net/domain/named.root and no doubt at
>     >> zillions of archive sites all over the net.
> 
>     >> I looked at the URL and found that the file is out-of-date, May
>     >> 22, 1999.
> 
> Wrong. That's the date that the FTP server says the file was last
> modified. This is not necessarily the same as the date the file's
> contents were actually changed. If you read the comments in that file,
> you would have seen the following comment:
> 
>         ;       last update:    Aug 22, 1997
>         ;       related version of root zone:   1997082200
> 
> FWIW, the file I just FTP'ed from ftp.rs.internic.net is identical to
> the one I installed on one of my name servers over 2 years ago. This
> added [J-M].ROOT-SERVERS.NET to the version of the file from 1995.
> That just added another 4 servers to the already existing 9 for other
> name servers to query when they started up. Hardly an earth-shattering
> change.

;       last update:    Aug 22, 1997
;       related version of root zone:   1997082200

Gee that's what it says.  I ran a hints from '94 and it needed
replacment when I went to bind-8.2.2p5 and dig is how I did it.

> 
>     >> It seems they have changed the root servers in the
>     >> meantime resulting in error above.
> 
> If 198.41.0.6 ever was a root server, it must have been a *very* long
> time ago. It wasn't even listed in the copy of root-servers.txt that
> was given in the 1st edition of Cricket's book: published in 1992 BTW.
> 

So what's your point?  Bind throws errors if the hints file isn't
reasonably correct. Or that it's not required or ...?

>     >> dig is still a good way to update your named.ca only
> 
> I thought that I'd already explained that it's usually irrelevant and
> unnecessary to update that file. Name servers only use it start-up to
> locate the root servers so as long as any one of the servers listed in
> that file answers, all is well. And the servers listed in that file
> are by definition (a) highly available; (b) spread all over the world
> on different nets; (c) unlikely to go away or be renumbered.
> 
> It's also highly unlikely that the file will get changed any time
> soon. First of all, adding more NS and A records for the root zone
> will probably make the answers too big to fit in the current DNS UDP
> payload of 512 bytes. That problem will go away when/if EDNS0 is
> deployed everywhere. Secondly, adding new root name servers is fraught
> wiith all sorts of political and logistical problems. So we have to
> wait for ICANN, IANA, IETF, WTO and everyone else who has something to
> say about this topic to reach a consensus and then implement it. Don't
> hold your breath waiting.


My point is still if it's out-of-date, bind throws errors. If you don't
want errors update the file. Or don't use named.ca/hints
just as you suggest.  
-- 
________________________________________________________________________________
G. Roderick Singleton, <gsingleton at home.com> PATH tech,
71 Underhill Drive, Unit 159, Toronto, ON  M3A 2J8
Voice : 416-452-4583 Fax: 416-452-0036 Toll Free: 1-888-354-PATH
________________________________________________________________________________

*** Notice To Bulk Emailers: Attention!  Pursuant to US Code, Title 47,
Chapter 5, Subchapter II, 227, any & all unsolicited commercial e-mail
sent to this address is subject to a download and archival fee in the
amount of the $1500 US and copies will be forwarded to domain
administrators.  Emailing denotes acceptance of said terms!