Re: Fotopic

Once upon a time, Nick Leverton <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[ Whois and DNS being separate systems ]
They are, of course, but the whois generally reflects the nameservers to
which the TLD will delegate (no doubt you and Roland know more about
mechanisms behind this than I do). However you can query the top
level domain servers directly and they are still aware of the fotopic
domain (see below).

Not sure if Whois data is used to update the root servers or the other
way round, but DNS will work perfectly well without whois, no recursive
DNS server I'm aware of does whois lookups at any point.

I don't recall what fotopic's name server arrangements were,

ns1.fotopic.net and ns2.fotopic.net as far as I remember. Of course
those could just be aliases or extra IPs on their ISP's nameservers, but
it seems more likely to me they were their own systems.

They were indeed in fotopic's own IP space, when I checked just after
the domain went down (I commented somewhere near here on the self-hosted
DNS servers IIRC).

Aha - I thought someone had done!

You can ask a.gtld-servers.net for an SOA record for fotopic and it will
return a referral and glue records to 193.0.234.2 and .3 which do indeed
still have rDNS of ns{0,1}.fotopic.net.

That's a change from when I checked it last. Still no www record
though, and trying to use "host" to get the NS IPs produces unusual
results - it almost looks as if the records exist on some but not all of
the parent domain authoritative hosts:

host ns0.fotopic.net
ns0.fotopic.net has address 193.0.234.2
Host ns0.fotopic.net not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
Host ns0.fotopic.net not found: 2(SERVFAIL)

host ns1.fotopic.net
ns1.fotopic.net has address 193.0.234.3
Host ns1.fotopic.net not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
Host ns1.fotopic.net not found: 2(SERVFAIL)

Note the two NS are indeed on adjacent IP addresses.

When I query RIPE for that netblock I get pointed to AS12390
which belongs to Kingston Internet. So to answer a later poster,
fotopic's servers are not in Japan, unless Hull has moved lately :)

As far as I can see this netblock is still routed but nothing behind
it replies any more, though at this point my diagnostic skills run out.
However the fact that the servers are not replying, whilst DNS is valid up
to the point that it should contact the servers, suggests some significant
problem with either the servers or the hosting rather than DNS or routing.

Agreed.

--
- The Iron Jelloid
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: dynamic ip ok for NFS/LDAP servers? Network Gurus?
    ... Pls consider a configuration with a single host providing NFS4 ... So, Question, is DHCP ok for the 6 hosts in this config, or go static. ... the static IP, netmask, gateway and DNS servers you want it to have. ... If you tie your DHCP server to your DNS service, ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Exchange Help!!!!
    ... Best not to have your ISP host your DNS, ... up on the Qwest Servers before actually changing the name servers. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: dynamic ip ok for NFS/LDAP servers? Network Gurus?
    ... Pls consider a configuration with a single host providing NFS4 ... So, Question, is DHCP ok for the 6 hosts in this config, or go static. ... I am also a fan of static IPs for servers (indeed, ... If you tie your DHCP server to your DNS service, ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: [opensuse] round robin dns for the repo mirrors
    ... balancing scheme for the repo mirrors. ... dns loadbalancer that selects from a pool of physical servers. ... Well, that's DNS round robin. ... Use 'host' and look at the ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: whois and DNS
    ... Is it possible that a public DNS domain name can propogate without a few ... days before it has it WhoIs registration info stored on WhoIS servers. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.dns)