From: Reggie Sniff (rsniffamllc.com)
Date: Tue Jan 02 2007 - 16:04:51 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This is very good to know. It seems to answer the question as to why they
act differently.

Knowing this, perhaps I am asking the wrong question.
Perhaps the proper question is "Why am I getting a 'host not found' error
just because my DNS server (the first in my list) cannot connect to the
remote DNS server" Is this the proper operation - to report a "host not
found" when the first DNS server in /etc/resolv.conf cannot connect to the
DNS of the domain I am trying to send to?

Here is my dig output, forcing the local DNS to try the lookup:
# dig localhost mx rsmi.com

; <<>> DiG 9.2.4 <<>> localhost mx rsmi.com
; (1 server found)
;; global options: printcmd
;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached

If I run dig without forcing the local DNS server, I get the expected
results.
i.e # dig mx rsmi.com --> This works fine.

Thanks for all the help and responses.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ben Beuchler" <insytegmail.com>
To: "Reggie Sniff" <rsniffamllc.com>
Cc: <postfix-userspostfix.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: Weird "Host not found" error

>> What I am wondering is not how to fix my DNS problem, but rather why
>> Postfix
>> doesn't get beyond the "Host not found" by trying another host in the
>> /etc/resolv/conf file....
>
> Dig will try every entry in resolv.conf. It behaves this way as it is
> a troubleshooting tool. This is not how the system resolver libraries
> behave, nor is it how they *should* behave. Once a DNS server has
> responded that the domain or host does not exist, it would be silly
> for the client library to assume that it's incorrect and move on to
> try two or three other DNS servers just to be sure.
>
> -Ben
>

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]