DNS misc

[Ben Scott]

On 4/19/05, Paul Lussier <p.lussier at comcast.net> wrote:
> IIRC, the problem was actually the listing of multiple search lines in
> /etc/resolv.conf.  The first search line was referenced, possibly the
> second, but I believe the tertiary was ignored.  FWIW, MS had a
> similar problem too.  Windows would allow you enter primary and
> secondary name server, but then would ignore all subsequently listed
> servers.

  Are you talking "search" lines or "nameserver" lines?  It sounds
like you're talking about "nameserver" lines, but it sounded like
Derek was talking about "search" lines.

  As far as "nameserver" lines go, I remember the "two nameserver
limit" from BIND 4 for sure.  It's long gone on modern Linux.  Windows
95/98/ME have a two nameserver limit built-in to the configuration UI,
let alone the resolver implementation.  Win 2000 and later are okay. 
NT4 had enough trouble with one nameserver, so any such limitation
wouldn't surprise me.

  I've never setup named under BIND 4.x (only the resolver), but BIND
8's named does not use resolv.conf for config, so "nameserver" lines
don't enter into the picture.  Forwarding is controlled in named.conf
(which uses a different syntax).

> Hmmm, I wonder if they just ripped the BIND resolver library code and
> ported it bug-for-bug ;)

  No, they added new ones as well.  Ha ha, only serious.  Like most
everybody else, Microsoft based their initial IP stack on BSD.  I
dunno how much of the BSD code survives in current stuff.