From: mouss (usebsdfree.fr)
Date: Tue Jan 02 2007 - 16:28:43 CST

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

Reggie Sniff wrote:
> 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.

fine like what? The MX records point to CNAMEs, which is illegal.

# host -t mx rsmi.com
rsmi.com. 3520 IN MX 10 emailscan9.mci.com.
rsmi.com. 3520 IN MX 20 emailscan9a.mci.com.

# host emailscan9.mci.com.
emailscan9.mci.com is an alias for cluster9.us.messagelabs.com.
...

# host emailscan9a.mci.com
emailscan9a.mci.com is an alias for cluster9a.us.messagelabs.com.
...

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