Re: DNSSEC
- From: Linux Addict <linuxaddict7@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 11:01:24 -0400
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@xxxxxx>wrote:
On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 10:27:25AM -0400,Actually that IP was our external NAT. One information I neglected to
Linux Addict <linuxaddict7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
a message of 89 lines which said:
lacks EDNS, defaults to 512"
DNS reply size limit is at least 490"
"Tested at 2010-05-04 14:21:02 UTC"
You edited the responses (which includes an IP address). Is it the IP
address of your resolver? There is may be a forwarder which does not
have EDNS.
Second possibility, a middlebox mangles your packets and deletes EDNS
options.
mention is bind forwards to a tinydns appliance which of course does not
support DNSSEC for obvious reasons.
So what are my options now? Will the internet work for me tomorrow?
At least I have company in Google..
dig +short rs.dns-oarc.net txt @8.8.8.8
rst.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.
rst.x485.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.
rst.x490.x485.x476.rs.dns-oarc.net.
"64.233.168.94 DNS reply size limit is at least 490"
"64.233.168.94 lacks EDNS, defaults to 512"
"Tested at 2010-05-04 15:00:07 UTC"
- Prev by Date: Re: DNSSEC
- Next by Date: receiving large queries with special characters
- Previous by thread: Re: DNSSEC
- Next by thread: Re: DNSSEC
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
