[nsd-users] NSD 4.1.14 release

[W.C.A. Wijngaards]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Hi Andreas,

NSD tries the masters in the order you listed them in the config file.
 If you list all the IPv4 first, and it is an IPv6-only server, I
guess that makes it slow.

Because initially the network is down, it'll do exponential backoff on
retries.  That explains the wait time.

NSD actually throttles fetching the zones, and does not do that
immediately after you start it.  It inserts short delays.

Best regards, Wouter

On 08/12/16 20:43, A. Schulze wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 08.12.2016 um 09:25 schrieb W.C.A. Wijngaards:
>> NSD 4.1.14 is available
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I run a root server mirror like described in
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7706#appendix-B.2 on a ipv6 only
> host. Not sure if the behavior is new but just noticed it:
> 
> Initial I start without a local "zonefile", without a database (
> nsd.conf has database: "" ) and also removed xfrdfile. I expect nsd
> /immediately/ start fetching the zone from a master. But sometimes
> it take 2 minutes:
> 
> Dec  8 20:31:55 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: connect 192.228.79.201
> failed: Network is unreachable Dec  8 20:31:55 dns nsd[10264]:
> xfrd: connect 192.33.4.12 failed: Network is unreachable Dec  8
> 20:31:55 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: connect 192.5.5.241 failed: Network
> is unreachable Dec  8 20:31:55 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: connect
> 192.112.36.4 failed: Network is unreachable Dec  8 20:31:55 dns
> nsd[10264]: xfrd: connect 193.0.14.129 failed: Network is
> unreachable Dec  8 20:31:55 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: connect
> 192.0.47.132 failed: Network is unreachable Dec  8 20:31:55 dns
> nsd[10264]: xfrd: connect 192.0.32.132 failed: Network is
> unreachable Dec  8 20:31:55 dns nsd[10305]: nsd started (NSD
> 4.1.14), pid 10264 Dec  8 20:33:55 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: zone .
> written received XFR packet from 2001:500:2f::f with serial
> 2016120801 to disk Dec  8 20:33:55 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: zone .
> written received XFR packet from 2001:500:2f::f with serial
> 2016120801 to disk Dec  8 20:33:55 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: zone .
> written received XFR packet from 2001:500:2f::f with serial
> 2016120801 to disk Dec  8 20:33:55 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: zone .
> written received XFR packet from 2001:500:2f::f with serial
> 2016120801 to disk Dec  8 20:33:55 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: zone .
> written received XFR packet from 2001:500:2f::f with serial
> 2016120801 to disk ... Dec  8 20:33:57 dns nsd[10264]: xfrd: zone .
> committed "received update to serial 2016120801 at
> 2016-12-08T20:33:57 from 2001:500:2f::f" Dec  8 20:33:57 dns
> nsd[10305]: zone . received update to serial 2016120801 at
> 2016-12-08T20:33:57 from 2001:500:2f::f of 1309648 bytes in 1.39327
> seconds
> 
> 
> The next time I start with "empty" nsd, it try via ipv6 first and
> operate as expected.
> 
> Is there any preference or a missing selection on the protocol used
> for zone transfer?
> 
> Andreas _______________________________________________ nsd-users
> mailing list nsd-users at NLnetLabs.nl 
> https://open.nlnetlabs.nl/mailman/listinfo/nsd-users
> 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=5XBA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----