Re: BIND 9.3.0rc4 is now available.

This is a discussion on Re: BIND 9.3.0rc4 is now available. within the Bind Users forums, part of the DNS and Related Forums category; > In article <chgm4d$1l44$1@sf1.isc.org>, > Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> ...


Go Back   Usenet Forums > DNS and Related Forums > Bind Users

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-08-2004
Mark Andrews
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: BIND 9.3.0rc4 is now available.


> In article <chgm4d$1l44$1@sf1.isc.org>,
> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >In article <chfgcf$26g5$1@sf1.isc.org>, Tom Diehl <tdiehl@rogueind.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 5 Sep 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:
> >>
> >> > Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> >> >
> >> > > > ... use dig instead. but we have to keep shipping [nslookup].
> >> > >
> >> > > There are undoubtedly many scripts out there that use it, too. It
> >> > > wouldn't be nice to break all of them just because there are better to

> ols
> >> > > available (e.g. awk hasn't been deprecated just because things like Pe

> rl
> >> > > and Python make it redundant).
> >> >
> >> > nslookup isn't redundant. it's Evil.
> >>
> >> Is there a document somewhere that gives specifics of why nslookup is evil

> ?
> >> I have been told this many times by various people but I have never actual

> ly
> >> seen an explaination of the issues. FWIW I use dig and I am not sure I eve

> n
> >> remember how to use nslookup anymore but I am courious.

> >
> >I don't know an official document, but here are some of the obvious
> >problems.
> >
> >nslookup gives misleading error messages, often conflating different
> >errors into the same message. For instance, it will tell you that a
> >name doesn't exist when it really means that the name doesn't have
> >records of the requested type.
> >
> >It has this really annoying requirement that the server named on the
> >command line (or the default server, if none was requested explicitly)
> >be able to reverse-resolve its own address. This is problematic when
> >you're querying a non-recursive server that doesn't happen to host the
> >reverse domain containing its address.
> >
> >It doesn't distinguish the sections that records appear in.
> >
> >Some of these problems can be worked around by enabling its debugging
> >mode, so that it shows the decoded queries and responses. But these are
> >much more verbose than dig, providing little extra information (it's
> >actually the same as using dig's +debug option).

>
> I think that some of these problems no longer exist in the nslookup that
> ships with Bind 9. I believe that the default server does not have to
> reverse-resolve. One place where nslookup is good is when you need to
> find the addresses of a bunch of machines. You can just type 'nslookup'
> and let it prompt you and then start feeding it machine names. If someone
> would have added this interactive user interface to dig or host, it would
> have been easier to get rid of nslookup.


You appear to be unaware of the dig's capabilities.

% dig +search +noall +answer -f -
drugs
drugs.dv.isc.org. 86400 IN A 192.168.191.236
farside
farside.isc.org. 3600 IN A 204.152.187.5
%

> >
> >--
> >Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
> >Arlington, MA
> >*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
> >

> --
> Tom Schulz
> schulz@adi.com
>

--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@isc.org

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0