Maintained by: NLnet Labs

[Unbound-users] also non-recursive support (snoop) by default?

Alexander Clouter
Fri Feb 5 14:39:43 CET 2010


Gábor Lénárt <lgb at lgb.hu> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 11:41:29AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Gábor Lénárt:
>> 
>> > We have a customer complaining that he can't use "dig +trace".
>> 
>> Just use "dig +trace @a.root-servers.net".  It's a bit inconvenient,
>> but it's not the end of the world.
> 
> Yes yes, this was the one I've recommended for him too :) Just he tried to
> make us implement the "comfortable" way with the explanation that RFCs says
> we must support it.  Thanks for all for the answers, and yes, of course I
> found that odd too, to implement non-recursive queries on a recursive-only
> nameserver for _all_ domains (or at least for root nameserver), it's quite
> non-sense, just I wanted to ask you how I can explain the problem with this
> idea in a way that he can accept.
> 
> Btw, I found it a bit odd, that dig don't have the heuristic to find this
> out, to try to fetch the list of root nameservers with recursive query too,
> or fall back to a built-in list (as nameservers uses root hints file
> too in some way).
> 
Not everyone uses the same root nameservers...

Cheers

-- 
Alexander Clouter
.sigmonster says: You will never know hunger.