This is a discussion on Re: BIND only resolves hostname on the second attempt within the Bind Users forums, part of the DNS and Related Forums category; I would like to add a comment from my own experience. I had exactly the same problem: slow resolution of ...
|
|||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
I would like to add a comment from my own experience.
I had exactly the same problem: slow resolution of uncached domains, about 4-5 seconds. On the Mac, that's enough to time out some resolver routines, such as those used by Safari, but I could see the delays from Linux too. I was running bind 9.2.4. I upgraded to 9.3.0 and made sure that named gets started with the -4 option. The problem is now gone. Had I not found this thread I would still be scratching my head. This problem makes me wonder if my choice of bind9 for a small home setup is overkill. Thank you! Luigi Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews@isc.org> wrote in message news:<cm6k42$1182$1@sf1.isc.org>... > > on 10/28/04 6:23 PM, Brian Kendig at brian@enchanter.net wrote: > > > > > I upgraded to BIND 9.3.0 and set "edns-udp-size 512;" in the options > > > section of my named.conf, but the same problem persists. > > > > More than likely not the issuse, start named with the -4 option and you > > should be all set. > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Scott Haneda Tel: 415.898.2602 > > <http://www.newgeo.com> Fax: 313.557.5052 > > <scott@newgeo.com> Novato, CA U.S.A. > > Looking at http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?...41028075356258 > anything which causes a retry (edns and firewall, ipv6 and > no IPv6 connectivity) results in the observed behaviour. > > Clearly the resolver timeout is way too short as it doesn't > allow for packet loss. > > Mark |