Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 10:43:56 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Kevin Oberman <oberman@es.net> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@FreeBSD.org>, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, xer xernet <xernet@hotmail.it> Subject: Re: stable 7.0 and nslookup help command Message-ID: <48EE42DC.9090202@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20081007224422.5388D4500F@ptavv.es.net> References: <20081007224422.5388D4500F@ptavv.es.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kevin Oberman wrote:
> More importantly, dig(1) uses the standard resolver routines while
> nslookup has its own.
Actually you have that backwards. :) dig generates a raw dns request
packet and sends it out on the wire itself, more or less acting as if
it were an actual name server. Therefore if you are trying to debug
problems with a name server it is the better choice.
host uses the name servers in /etc/resolv.conf and more or less acts
as a local stub resolver. It's a good choice if you just want to get
the answer to "what does <this> resolve to?" It's also a good tool for
debugging what's happening when an application on your system is
getting an answer other than the one you think it should get.
nslookup actually uses the local stub resolver, and has the benefit of
having been around a long time so it's something people know. It's
also a good tool to debug the local stub resolver if you're getting an
answer other than what you think you should be getting, and/or
different from what dig/host say.
hth,
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48EE42DC.9090202>