| 1 |
On 01/09/2013 10:24, Grant wrote: |
| 2 |
>> Instead just use dig, using google.com as an example get the NS records |
| 3 |
>> > first: |
| 4 |
>> > |
| 5 |
>> > $ dig ns google.com +short |
| 6 |
>> > ns3.google.com. |
| 7 |
>> > ns2.google.com. |
| 8 |
>> > ns1.google.com. |
| 9 |
>> > ns4.google.com. |
| 10 |
>> > |
| 11 |
>> > Then query each of those name server in turn directly for the SOA: |
| 12 |
>> > |
| 13 |
>> > $ dig soa google.com +short @ns3.google.com |
| 14 |
>> > ns1.google.com. dns-admin.google.com. 2013081400 7200 1800 1209600 300 |
| 15 |
>> > |
| 16 |
>> > That's a correct SOA record. |
| 17 |
> Does this look OK? |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> $ dig soa MASKED.com +short @MASKED1.MASKED.com |
| 20 |
> MASKED1.MASKED.com. MASKED.MASKED.com. YYYYMMDD00 3600 1801 604800 3601 |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
That looks OK, doubly so if all listed NS servers return the same answer |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
In all likelihood I'd say you are dealing with a DNS-check web site that |
| 26 |
is over-enthusiastic, or can't deal with network errors or just plain buggy. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
IOW, odds are very good that there is nothing wrong with your domain at |
| 29 |
all :-) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 35 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives