[UNsolved] was: what does dig +trace do?

[Tom Schmitt]

> > In my case, dig is asking for the nameservers of the root-zone and is
> > getting the answer:
> > . IN NS root1
> > . IN NS root2 
> > etc
> > 
> > Next dig is asking for the A-record of root1. And here is the
> > differrence:
> > 
> > If I do "dig root1" dig is asking exactly this, it is asking for the
> > A-record of root1. And of course I get the correct answer from named.
> > 
> > The +trace option does not do this!
> > Instead, the +trace-option is using the searchsuffix in the 
> > resolv.conf
> > and is asking for root1.my.search.suffix. and NOT for root1.
> > This is why the +trace option fails every time.
> > 

> 
> No, IMHO, it's a bug in your root zone.
> Names without dot at end are relative. Change your root zone to say
> . IN NS root1.
> . IN NS root2.
> 
> (with dots appended) and you should be home.
> 

No. 

Sorry: The answer quoted above I typed by hand instead of copy&paste and so I forgot the dots at the end. In my root zone there are of course dots at the end of the names. 
But the +trace option is ignoring these dots.

As this bug is only visible if you have your own root-zone and Nameservers directly in this zone, I think there are not many people out there who will stumble over this.



-- 
NEU: FreePhone - 0ct/min Handyspartarif mit Geld-zurück-Garantie!		
Jetzt informieren: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/freephone