Comments on: Server 2008 DNS Resolution Issue http://www.bibble-it.com/2009/08/29/server-2008-dns-resolution-issue My collection of Sys-Admin workarrounds and tips Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:07:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Rob L. http://www.bibble-it.com/2009/08/29/server-2008-dns-resolution-issue/comment-page-1#comment-4243 Rob L. Wed, 29 Dec 2010 13:59:33 +0000 http://www.bibble-it.com/?p=239#comment-4243 Ben, Great write up and screen cast. We are getting affect by this a lot recently. But like you explained I don't think Microsoft's resolution of setting MaxCacheTTL to 2 days is the proper fix. That assumes all name servers use a TTL of 2 days for their NS records. Seems to me they should release a hotfix for this. Of course what is the bug? Is it that DNS Server is ignoring the TTL of the glue records or is it that DNS Server is not applying MaxCacheTTL to NS records? I guess this depends on what MaxCacheTTL is designed to do. Is it supposed to be a default TTL when the responding DNS server doesn't specifiy a TTL or is it meant to say I don't any records cached on my server for X number of seconds (default being 1 day). If the purpose is the latter I would suggest the bug is that DNS Server is not applying MaxCachTTL to NS records. Ben,
Great write up and screen cast. We are getting affect by this a lot recently. But like you explained I don’t think Microsoft’s resolution of setting MaxCacheTTL to 2 days is the proper fix. That assumes all name servers use a TTL of 2 days for their NS records. Seems to me they should release a hotfix for this.

Of course what is the bug? Is it that DNS Server is ignoring the TTL of the glue records or is it that DNS Server is not applying MaxCacheTTL to NS records? I guess this depends on what MaxCacheTTL is designed to do. Is it supposed to be a default TTL when the responding DNS server doesn’t specifiy a TTL or is it meant to say I don’t any records cached on my server for X number of seconds (default being 1 day). If the purpose is the latter I would suggest the bug is that DNS Server is not applying MaxCachTTL to NS records.

]]> By: Rob http://www.bibble-it.com/2009/08/29/server-2008-dns-resolution-issue/comment-page-1#comment-3553 Rob Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:33:00 +0000 http://www.bibble-it.com/?p=239#comment-3553 Outstanding, and very helpful. Thanks so much! Outstanding, and very helpful. Thanks so much!

]]> By: BrendanS http://www.bibble-it.com/2009/08/29/server-2008-dns-resolution-issue/comment-page-1#comment-2095 BrendanS Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:34:03 +0000 http://www.bibble-it.com/?p=239#comment-2095 Excellent webcast, very useful. Excellent webcast, very useful.

]]> By: John http://www.bibble-it.com/2009/08/29/server-2008-dns-resolution-issue/comment-page-1#comment-1722 John Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:37:02 +0000 http://www.bibble-it.com/?p=239#comment-1722 Very nice. I have not seen it myself, but a warned person counts for two (dutch saying). Very nice.
I have not seen it myself, but a warned person counts for two (dutch saying).

]]> By: Ian0x0r http://www.bibble-it.com/2009/08/29/server-2008-dns-resolution-issue/comment-page-1#comment-1222 Ian0x0r Tue, 01 Sep 2009 07:08:16 +0000 http://www.bibble-it.com/?p=239#comment-1222 Like the webcast, very informative. One slight error though is the demo at the very end at about 7:45 you say the record is valid for 1 hour 23 instead of 1 day 23 hours. Cool though! :) Like the webcast, very informative. One slight error though is the demo at the very end at about 7:45 you say the record is valid for 1 hour 23 instead of 1 day 23 hours. Cool though! :)

]]>