2 problems: "temporary name lookup failures" & updating TLD servers

[Linda W.]

Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

>On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 11:32:25PM -0700, Linda W. <bind at tlinx.org> wrote 
>  
>
>>I have b/c/e/g/n/o listed with their authoritative root servers 
>>    
>>
>                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>                                       This means nothing. TLD have
>				       authoritative name servers,
>				       period.
>  
>
This is from the bind9 Configuration Reference:

Stub zones can be used to eliminate the need for glue NS record in a 
parent zone at the expense of maintaining a stub zone entry and a set of 
name server addresses in named.conf. This usage is not recommended for 
new configurations, and BIND 9 supports it only in a limited way. In 
BIND 4/8, zone transfers of a parent zone included the NS records from 
stub children of that zone. ...
------
    As noted above, it was not uncommon for those who used bind4 and 
bind8 to eliminate the need for some glue records by keeping addresses 
locally.  They were _FIXED_ and there were only 4 main TLD's: edu, org, 
gov and com.  It wasn't that complicated to
throw in the TLD NS address records into a config file.
---
    If you've been running bind for 10 years you would know that
---
    Ok, so maybe it as more than 10 years....:-)

>>am now able to resolve gov addresses.
>>    
>>
>Wonderful: a lot of work to do something that any nameserver on the
>planet does without hassles.
>  
>
Your sarcasm is unuseful, though your advice may be.
The manual says it isn't recommended for new installations.  Mine isn't 
new --
and I likely won't use stub zones for the TLD's in the future as was common
practice -- something born out as being common even in bind8 setups.

>>Wouldn't you want name resolution to be generally as fast as
>>possible?
>>    
>>
>I want the system to work. I pity your users.
>  
>
    Sigh.  It WAS working.  It just started having problems last week.  
It's worked for many years.  I asked for people's shared experiences 
with current practice because
changing standards and practice was beginning to make the old way not 
work so well.

However, once it is working, I still want it to work "well".  If I could 
just
download 1 10 meg file every morning and have 90% of my name lookups be 
local all
day it would be WAY worth it.  It's all the small lookups and 
transactions that
slow things down.  If bulked up and xferred all at once, I could likely 
save tons of
wait time for setting up, waiting on network and server latency and 
tear-down if I
could spend a minute downloading a large file every morning....

Thanks for your help despite the 'tude.
-l

-- 
    In the marketplace of "Real goods", capitalism is limited by safety
    regulations, consumer protection laws, and product liability.  In
    the computer industry, what protects consumers (other than vendor
    good will that seems to diminish inversely to their size)?