timeouts and negative caching

[Gerd v. Egidy]

Hi Tony,

> Look at the lame-ttl option. (though I think the behaviour is more
> complicated than the documentation implies)

I can report that lame-ttl doesn't help either, the timeout ttl stays at 300 
secs. 

>From reading the manual it seems to me that a "lame server" is something 
different than a server not responding in time. But as you suggest it may be 
that the manual does not cover this completely...

At least I have perfected the procedure to reproduce the behavior, it just 
takes me a few minutes now till I get it.

Kind regards,

Gerd