Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Jul 2001 12:24:28 +0200
From:      Len Conrad <LConrad@Go2France.com>
To:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Weird named problem - IN A for nameservers being lost!
Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010717120221.03aa6ec8@mail.Go2France.com>
In-Reply-To: <200107170045.f6H0j8N33016@earth.backplane.com>
References:  <5.1.0.14.0.20010622153827.02fa0da0@mail.Go2France.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20010622153827.02fa0da0@mail.Go2France.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20010623185802.04051eb0@mail.Go2France.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

>     If you look at the cache dumps and dig output below, you can clearly
>     see the timeout for fuji.jamcracker.com is less then the timeout
>     for jamcracker.com AFTER we've looked up other elements for fuji,
>     which means that when it timed out, that IN A record will be gone.
>     But that IN A record is the IP address for the NS.  So when it times
>     out, the jamcracker entry is left there with no NS records whatsoever.

If a resolver needs the ip for an hostname, it looks it up.  If the A has 
expired earlier than the NS, so what? The resolver queries anew for the A 
of the NS hostname.  Itīs available at the authoritative NS, a much more 
credible source than a cache which can be poisoned.

>     I believe what is happening is that something is looking up other
>     records for fuji, and this is replacing the original glue record with
>     the real IN A record

sounds like a good idea, no?   Turn on query logging to try to see that 
"something" ?

>, but also changing the timeouts somehow and
>     causing fuji's record to timeout early.

Thereīs no requirement that NS and A records have the same TTL, is there?

Thereīs no requirement for a referral to even include glue, either.

>     This has occured with several mail destinations, not just 
> jamcracker.    I went through jamcrackers whole DNS hierarchy and 
> everything is setup
>     properly, including all the timeouts (they are all set to 3600 seconds).
>
>     Has anyone else seen this?  Anyone know what is going on here?

All BIND8 machines should be running in "anti-cache-poisoning" mode, ie, 
with option for recursion off or restricted to trusted ipīs AND "fetch-glue 
no;".  Both are required to defend against cache poisoning.  This should 
equate to the compile option NOADDITIONAL, I think.

In BIND9, there is no option for "fetch-glue no".  It is the hard-wired 
default.

btw, about 30% of internet nameservers are have poisonable caches.

btw, the people at Men&Mice have tried to work with MS about this since NT4 
DNS and W2K DNS are both poisonable out of the box, contrary to MSīs 
intentions for W2K DNS, requiring a registry hack to fix.

You might run with "fetch-glue no" and restricted recursion to see if it 
helps with your unequal timeouts and the apparent re-fetching of "real" glue.

Sorry, Iīve come into this thread a little late.

Len

http://MenAndMice.com/DNS-training
http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com : ISC BIND 8.2.4 for NT4 & W2K
http://IMGate.MEIway.com  : Build free, hi-perf, anti-abuse mail gateways


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5.1.0.14.0.20010717120221.03aa6ec8>