-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Well, I don't know what a recursor is but you can use .194. It is currently not being used. Is this permanent, ie do I label it as "testing" or do you need it for a more permanent basis. If you need it permanently, that is fine; I just need to know how to label it in our database.
On 01/20/2016 05:51 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
Hi,
I don't think that this is just *your* problem.
So far we have had random crashes of dnsmasq on random machines. Sometimes that happens three times in a row within 10 minutes. Sometimes that doesn't happen for a few months. We have had this with many name servers. Some of which have been reported to "work better". Some of which have been reported to work "worse". That also includes 8.8.8.8 and the LWL name servers.
So it is just you who is having the troubles more often than usual. Maybe that will go away soon.
I am not fully convinced that the type of server plays a big role in here. It might be something like the timing of the replies, etc. What leads me to that idea is that the crashes are usually not reproducible by a single query that goes wrong.
I can set up a recursor on the machine you set up for me. Just give it an additional IP address and I will setup the resolver. I am maintaining a few already, so this won't hurt at all.
Best, -Michael
On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 12:58 -0600, R. W. Rodolico wrote:
Ok. I just want to make sure this is not a local problem.
Am I the only one who is having issues? If so, then all this work has been for nothing. I was under the impression that there were several reports of this issue, but if I'm the only one having the problem, then I'll rebuild the test router (my home office router) and we'll put effort into something else.
Again, if several people are reporting it, it is something that needs to be fixed. But if I'm the only one with the issue, then it is probably *MY* problem, not a problem with something else.
Fred, I agree, it looks like it is a problem with dnsmaq and certain DNS providers, but I'm using Google and Level 3 for my tests and it fails every couple of weeks. I'm suspicious of the DNS servers which make money off their services by putting ads up (which it appears Level 3 does. If you put an invalid domain name up, it comes up with an ad to purchase it. I have not looked at their traffic patterns to see what it is, but I had absolute no issues when I was using the German servers.
So, if you think this is a one off, let's get off the issue and I'll work on *MY* problem.
Let me know.
Rod
On 01/20/2016 12:23 PM, Kienker, Fred wrote:
The last update to dnsmasq has run fine on all of our IPFire systems with the Google and Level 3 DNS servers for an extended period of time. Could all of the issues be a conflict with the dnsmasq code and *certain* DNS providers? If so this seems like a much harder problem to fix.
Fred
-----Original Message----- From: Matthias Fischer [mailto:matthias.fischer@ipfire.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 2:59 PM To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] dnsmasq 2.75: next patch... (No.50)
Hi,
On 19.01.2016 08:39, R. W. Rodolico wrote:
I installed this package yesterday and dnsmasq broke a few minutes
ago.
About 24 hours.
Worked for 24 hours and then crashed? Weird. But thinking of it, this could be one of the reasons why its not crashing *here*. Every 24 hours my ISP cuts the connection, and our router gets a new IP and 'dnsmasq' restarts!
Strange thing: when I was using the servers you recommended 84.200.69.80, 84.200.70.40 I did not have any problems even though you
have been updating very frequently. However, I reverted to the old DNS
servers 209.244.0.3 8.8.4.4 and in less than a few days (I think I did it with the 15th or 14th update), it broke again. Those servers are, respectively, resolver1.level3.net and one of the google ones.
So as I understand you, its related with the DNS servers you use!? With your ISP servers, it crashes and with the german servers, it doesn't?
Let me know if you want me to use the 84 DNS servers. Hell, I may just
decide to build my own caching DNS servers!!!
Ok, solution found - that was easy... ;-))
But as long as I'm working on this, I'm more and more sure that these intermediate crashes are really a combination between the DNS servers and 'dnsmasq' itself. Sad to say, I haven't got the (C-)skills to debug this.
Right now, I'm trying to compile 'dnsmasq' with patches 051-053: it now crashes in 'forward.c' during compilation if I activate the DNSSEC-option (-e 's|/* #define HAVE_DNSSEC */|#define HAVE_DNSSEC|g' ). Reason: patch No.053, I think.
In contrast, the '2.76test6'-version compiles without *any* error, if I delete and disable *all* of our adjustments.
As Simon wrote: "Conditional combination has a nasty combinatorial explosion. I should hack up a regression test to build all possible variants."
But obviously this wasn't done yet. If I leave everything as it is, its building...
Perhaps I'll try another request on the dnsmasq-list during the next days. The last one had no effect, no answers, nothing.
Best, Matthias
- -- Rod Rodolico Daily Data, Inc. POB 140465 Dallas TX 75214-0465 214.827.2170 http://www.dailydata.net