Problems Resolving Active Directory Entries
Kevin Darcy
kcd at daimlerchrysler.com
Thu Dec 9 21:25:07 UTC 2004
Well, the obvious answer is that 192.168.9.10 is answering differently
than 127.0.0.1. Do you have any "view"s defined in your config? Are you
running multiple instances of named?
Failing that, if you "anonymized" the actual domains used for the
purposes of posting to this list, check the original output
*very*carefully* to verify that you didn't mistype something on your
first query.
- Kevin
Jiann-Ming Su wrote:
>I'm using BIND 9.2.2. I have the following in my db.mydomain.bogus file:
>
> dc1.ad IN A 192.168.209.166
> dc2.ad IN A 192.168.209.167
>
> _TCP.ad IN NS dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _TCP.ad IN NS dc2.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _UDP.ad IN NS dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _UDP.ad IN NS dc2.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _MSDCS.ad IN NS dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _MSDCS.ad IN NS dc2.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _SITES.ad IN NS dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _SITES.ad IN NS dc2.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _DomainDnsZone.ad IN NS dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _DomainDnsZone.ad IN NS dc2.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _ForrestDnsZone.ad IN NS dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _ForrestDnsZone.ad IN NS dc2.ad.mydomain.bogus.
>
>Then I run dig on my master nameserver:
>
> [ns-master]$ dig _TCP.ad.mydomain.bogus. -t SOA
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.2.2 <<>> _TCP.ad.mydomain.bogus. -t SOA
> ;; global options: printcmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 36824
> ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
>
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;_TCP.ad.mydomain.bogus. IN SOA
>
> ;; Query time: 2 msec
> ;; SERVER: 192.168.9.10#53(192.168.9.10)
> ;; WHEN: Thu Dec 9 15:13:11 2004
> ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 39
>
>Notice that nothing returns. But, if I specify the localhost to query:
>
> [ns-master]$ dig @127.0.0.1 _TCP.ad.mydomain.bogus. -t SOA
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.2.2 <<>> @127.0.0.1 _TCP.ad.mydomain.bogus. -t SOA
> ;; global options: printcmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 18235
> ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2
>
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;_TCP.ad.mydomain.bogus. IN SOA
>
> ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> _TCP.ad.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus.
> _TCP.ad.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS dc2.ad.mydomain.bogus.
>
> ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.209.166
> dc2.ad.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.209.167
>
> ;; Query time: 0 msec
> ;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
> ;; WHEN: Thu Dec 9 15:15:46 2004
> ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 119
>
>For reference, dc1 and dc2 resolves:
>
> [ns-master]$ dig dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus
>
> ; <<>> DiG 9.2.2 <<>> dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus
> ;; global options: printcmd
> ;; Got answer:
> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 36776
> ;; flags: qr aa rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 8, ADDITIONAL: 8
>
> ;; QUESTION SECTION:
> ;dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus. IN A
>
> ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> dc1.ad.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.209.166
>
> ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
> mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS ns1.mydomain.bogus.
> mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS ns2.mydomain.bogus.
> mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS ns3.mydomain.bogus.
> mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS ns4.mydomain.bogus.
> mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS ns5.mydomain.bogus.
> mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS ns6.mydomain.bogus.
> mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS ns7.mydomain.bogus.
> mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN NS ns8.mydomain.bogus.
>
> ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
> ns1.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.200.30
> ns2.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.16.100
> ns3.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.5.100
> ns4.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.48.100
> ns5.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.32.100
> ns6.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.1.1
> ns7.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.96.100
> ns8.mydomain.bogus. 86400 IN A 192.168.2.1
>
> ;; Query time: 1 msec
> ;; SERVER: 192.168.9.10#53(192.168.9.10)
> ;; WHEN: Thu Dec 9 15:23:15 2004
> ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 353
>
>
>When I do a tcpdump of the DNS traffic, the only obvious difference I see
>is "Reply code: No such name (3)" for the one that didn't work. Is this
>a bug? Or, do I have something misconfigured? Thanks for any insight.
>
>
>
More information about the bind-users
mailing list