Re: Recursion is needed (Wheezy)
Hi
[please don't top-post - I've re-arranged the email accordingly]
> On 10/13/13, Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com> wrote:
> > Yudi wrote:
> >> I just used Wheezy's BIND9.
> >> There is a problem where checking nslookup, example nslookup
> >> www.google.com
> >>
> >> But Recursion is needed.
> >
> > Please show us what error you are having. Otherwise no one can help
> > you. Please cut and past the error verbatim.
> >
> > Bob
> >
>
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:18:30AM +0700, yudi santosa wrote:
> Here the error :
>
> root@ns01:~#nslookup www.google.com
> ;; Got recursion not available from 192.168.1.1, trying next server
> ;; Got SERVFAIL reply from 127.0.0.1, trying next server
> Server: 127.0.0.1
> Address: 127.0.0.1#53
>
> ** server cant't find www.google.com: NXDOMAIN
If my understanding of DNS resolution is correct then you have two
servers listed in /etc/resolv.conf: 192.168.1.1 and 127.0.0.1. Which
is unusual, but not necessarily wrong. If you got the DNS server
details via DHCP then something is definitely wrong: DHCP servers
would not tell clients to ask themselves for DNS queries (!)
nslookup tried the first server at 192.168.1.1 (your local LAN/WIFI I
assume). But this server is not configured to accept recursive
queries, i.e. it will only accept queries for domains it its zone
files. Assuming that 192.168.1.1 is your local LAN's DNS server, then
this DNS server is misconfigured.
The nslookup tried the 2nd server (127.0.0.1) which didn't have a clue
about the google.com domain.
So you may have two separate problems on your hands here. I'd
recommend that you first look at *why* 192.168.1.1 will not respond to
recursive queries - the default configuration for bind would (at least
on Debian), so something has been misconfigured there since install.
If you are using DHCP on this network and got the DNS details via
DHCP, then the DHCP server is likely misconfigured too: telling
clients to use 127.0.0.1 for DNS lookups is a not-so-subtle way of
telling clients to "f off" !?
--
Karl E. Jorgensen
Reply to: