cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

creamola
Grafter
Posts: 51
Registered: ‎28-10-2007

Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

I am being given a DNS server of 212.159.6.9 - but it won't resolve this url: http://www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk
However, if I set my DNS server to OpenDNS (208.67.222.222) that url resolves fine.
Anyone else seeing similar weirdness?
13 REPLIES 13
David_W
Rising Star
Posts: 2,305
Thanks: 33
Registered: ‎19-07-2007

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

With Nslookup I get:
C:\Users\David>nslookup www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk ; 212.159.6.9
Server:  cdns01.plus.net
Address:  212.159.6.9
*** cdns01.plus.net can't find www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk: Non-existent domain
If I use Google I get:
C:\Users\David>nslookup www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk 8.8.8.8
Server:  google-public-dns-a.google.com
Address:  8.8.8.8
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:    web6.e4education.co.uk
Addresses:  178.63.100.205
          78.46.108.137
Aliases:  www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk
So could be PN's DNS.
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

This looks very similar to a problem I had a few months ago - http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,89425.0.html
jelv
Seasoned Hero
Posts: 26,785
Thanks: 971
Fixes: 10
Registered: ‎10-04-2007

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

Definitely something odd going on!
C:\Users\John>nslookup www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk 212.159.6.9
Server:  cdns01.plus.net
Address:  212.159.6.9
*** cdns01.plus.net can't find www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk: Non-existent domain
C:\Users\John>nslookup www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk 212.159.6.10
Server:  cdns02.plus.net
Address:  212.159.6.10
*** cdns02.plus.net can't find www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk: Non-existent domain
C:\Users\John>nslookup www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk 212.159.13.49
Server:  cdns01.plus.net
Address:  212.159.13.49
*** cdns01.plus.net can't find www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk: Non-existent domain
C:\Users\John>nslookup www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk 212.159.13.50
Server:  cdns02.plus.net
Address:  212.159.13.50
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:    web6.e4education.co.uk
Addresses:  78.46.108.137
          178.63.100.205
Aliases:  www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£14.40/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
MJN
Pro
Posts: 1,318
Thanks: 161
Fixes: 5
Registered: ‎26-08-2010

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

I would recommend not using nslookup for DNS troubleshooting - it can behave it some unusual ways and presents its results in too abstract a manner to be able to pick apart the nuances of some of the more complicated (and subtle) problems.
Back to the problem, the cause is with the configuration of the st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk domain or, specifically, the DNS configuration of the authoritative servers for that domain...
If we ask Nominet (managers of the .uk namespace) who is responsible for the st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk domain we get:
$ dig @ns1.nic.uk st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk ns
; <<>> DiG 9.3.2-P2.3 <<>> @ns1.nic.uk st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk ns
; (2 servers found)
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 63722
;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk.      IN      NS
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk. 172800 IN     NS      ns0.ifl.net.
st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk. 172800 IN     NS      ns1.ifl.net.
;; Query time: 42 msec
;; SERVER: 2a01:40:1001:35::2#53(2a01:40:1001:35::2)
;; WHEN: Wed May  4 22:40:33 2011
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 855

So, ns0.ifl.net and ns1.ifl.net. If we ask them (IFL) the same question we get the same results (as expected). If, however, we ask them for the A record for www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk we get the following:
$ dig @ns0.ifl.net www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk
; <<>> DiG 9.3.2-P2.3 <<>> @ns0.ifl.net www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk
; (1 server found)
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 63874
;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk.  IN      A
;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk. 0 IN      CNAME   web6.e4education.co.uk.
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
.                       86400   IN      SOA     ns0.ifl.net. dnsmaster.rmplc.co.uk. 2011040500 28800 7200 604800 86400
;; Query time: 57 msec
;; SERVER: 194.238.48.51#53(194.238.48.51)
;; WHEN: Wed May  4 22:44:44 2011
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 142

Okay, so www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk is an alias for web6.e4education.co.uk. No problem with that, however the problem is that ns0.ifl.net thinks that that domain (record) doesn't exist (hence the NXDOMAIN status). The reason for this? Well, the authority section holds the answer - ns0.ifl.net thinks *it* is authoritive for the root of the DNS hence if it doesn't know how to get to the domain then nobody does. This is a misconfiguration (unintentional I'm sure but you never know...).
The inconsistency of results between Plusnet's DNS server and somebody elses (OpenDNS etc) is down to the knowledge (or not) of the e4education.co.uk domain i.e. the domain of the record (web6.e4education.co.uk) that www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk is an alias of. Plusnet appear to be accepting ns0.ifl.net's view of the world and running straight into the misconfiguration brickwall. However, other DNS's are politely ignoring ns0.ifl.net's claims about authority (for the root!) and starting the iterative process again to crawl the e4education.co.uk tree. In particular, assuming no prior knowledge, they are returning to the root (the real root, not ns0.ifl.net's usurped authority), being referred to Nominet, and finding that the authority for e4education.co.uk resides with ns.rackspace.com and ns2.rackspace.com:
$ dig @ns1.nic.uk e4education.co.uk ns
; <<>> DiG 9.3.2-P2.3 <<>> @ns1.nic.uk e4education.co.uk ns
; (2 servers found)
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 24666
;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;e4education.co.uk.             IN      NS
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
e4education.co.uk.      172800  IN      NS      ns2.rackspace.com.
e4education.co.uk.      172800  IN      NS      ns.rackspace.com.
;; Query time: 43 msec
;; SERVER: 2a01:40:1001:35::2#53(2a01:40:1001:35::2)
;; WHEN: Wed May  4 22:50:55 2011
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 83

And from the Rackspace servers can then find the target:
$ dig @ns.rackspace.com web6.e4education.co.uk a
; <<>> DiG 9.3.2-P2.3 <<>> @ns.rackspace.com web6.e4education.co.uk a
; (1 server found)
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 19022
;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;web6.e4education.co.uk.                IN      A
;; ANSWER SECTION:
web6.e4education.co.uk. 86400   IN      A       78.46.108.137
web6.e4education.co.uk. 86400   IN      A       178.63.100.205
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
e4education.co.uk.      86400   IN      NS      ns.rackspace.com.
e4education.co.uk.      86400   IN      NS      ns2.rackspace.com.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION:
ns.rackspace.com.       86400   IN      A       69.20.95.4
ns2.rackspace.com.      86400   IN      A       65.61.188.4
;; Query time: 45 msec
;; SERVER: 69.20.95.4#53(69.20.95.4)
;; WHEN: Wed May  4 22:51:51 2011
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 152

So, to summarise: the DNS servers at ns0.ifl.net and ns1.ifl.net are incorrectly configured (and appear to have been since 05/04/2011 if their SOA serials are following convention) so St Laurence school ought to be giving them a prod. However, the question of why Plusnet are taking the word of ns0.ifl.net for a record outside of the server's bailiwick ought to be also addressed - the reason being that in misconfiguration cases like these it will unecessarilly stop Plusnet in its tracks.
[Edit: I've reported the misconfiguration to IPL (RM plc)]
Mathew
WWWombat
Grafter
Posts: 1,412
Thanks: 4
Registered: ‎29-01-2009

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

Well, you learn something every day! I always wondered what NXDOMAIN meant...
Just to be clear - when you say that "that ns0.ifl.net thinks that that domain (record) doesn't exist (hence the NXDOMAIN status)," do you mean the record for the "e4education.co.uk" domain?
If ns0.ifl.net was really authoritive over both the "www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk" CNAME and the "e4education.co.uk" domain, would you expect the one DN request to return both the CNAME definition for www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk *and* the A record for "web6.e4education.co.uk" in the one combined response?
Plusnet Customer
Using FTTC since 2011. Currently on 80/20 Unlimited Fibre Extra.
MJN
Pro
Posts: 1,318
Thanks: 161
Fixes: 5
Registered: ‎26-08-2010

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

Quote from: WWWombat
Just to be clear - when you say that "that ns0.ifl.net thinks that that domain (record) doesn't exist (hence the NXDOMAIN status)," do you mean the record for the "e4education.co.uk" domain?

Specifically the whole record 'web6.e4education.co.uk'. Given that ns0.ifl.net considered itself authoritive for the root (i.e. the dot on the far right hand side that we usually omit) then if it didn't know what path to take to resolve that record then as far as it is concerned the record doesn't exist.
Quote
If ns0.ifl.net was really authoritive over both the "www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk" CNAME and the "e4education.co.uk" domain, would you expect the one DN request to return both the CNAME definition for www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk *and* the A record for "web6.e4education.co.uk" in the one combined response?

You would. DNS servers usually try and be as helpful as possible in providing answers to your queries as whilst it could just say 'www.st-laurence.wilts.sch.uk is an alias for web6.e4education.co.uk so go and look that record up instead' if it already knows the answer to that subsequent lookup (because it is authoritve for that domain also) then it would give the result in the same lookup to save you having to come back anyway. However, it'll only give out authoritive answers i.e. answers that it is authoritive for. In this case it wasn't authoritive for the e4education.co.uk domain, or rather it thought it was but didn't have a result to give hence the NXDOMAIN response.
Incidentally, I received a response from IFL/RM and they've removed the rogue root authority records hence the record ill now resolve correctly for everyone (including Plusnet!).
Mathew
creamola
Grafter
Posts: 51
Registered: ‎28-10-2007

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

Matthew - you are a hero!
A really big thanks for this - because as you noted, my daughters mates said at school today that they had been unable to access the site yesterday.
So, job done - no excuse for not doing the homework now!
Thanks,
Creamola.
MJN
Pro
Posts: 1,318
Thanks: 161
Fixes: 5
Registered: ‎26-08-2010

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

You're welcome! Nothing like a quirky DNS problem to get the brain cells working - now that would be my kind of homework...!  Wink
Mathew
WWWombat
Grafter
Posts: 1,412
Thanks: 4
Registered: ‎29-01-2009

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

Thanks MJN.
I had to go back and re-read your explanation of the root authority, but I see what you mean now. Quite a significant mishap there...
Plusnet Customer
Using FTTC since 2011. Currently on 80/20 Unlimited Fibre Extra.
bobpullen
Community Gaffer
Community Gaffer
Posts: 16,887
Thanks: 4,979
Fixes: 316
Registered: ‎04-04-2007

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

Quote from: MJN
However, the question of why Plusnet are taking the word of ns0.ifl.net for a record outside of the server's bailiwick ought to be also addressed - the reason being that in misconfiguration cases like these it will unecessarilly stop Plusnet in its tracks.

Could it be something to do with the DNS recursor we're using? (PowerDNS rather than BIND). I don't suppose it's outside of the realms of possibility for the two to handle situations like the one above differently (although admittedly that would be slightly odd).
Could be that we could get around the problem with a config change but I'm not well versed enough to delve into the inner workings of our current set-up. Did do a spot of Googling but after ten mins or so, the closest I could find was this.

Bob Pullen
Plusnet Product Team
If I've been helpful then please give thanks ⤵

jelv
Seasoned Hero
Posts: 26,785
Thanks: 971
Fixes: 10
Registered: ‎10-04-2007

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

Nobody has posted a suggestion as to how I got the results I did in Reply #3 where three of the Plusnet DNS servers answered Non-existent domain and one answered with the correct IP!
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£14.40/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
MJN
Pro
Posts: 1,318
Thanks: 161
Fixes: 5
Registered: ‎26-08-2010

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

Quote from: Bob
Could it be something to do with the DNS recursor we're using? (PowerDNS rather than BIND). I don't suppose it's outside of the realms of possibility for the two to handle situations like the one above differently (although admittedly that would be slightly odd).

To be honest Ben, the whole issue of CNAMEs and how they're configured and handled is arguably one of DNS's muddiest areas. The original standards could be interepreted in multiple ways and whilst there has been some agreement and clarification over the years this still leaves room for differences between implementations, particular when they've evolved with different opinions on what is 'right'. In most cases it's not an issue because DNS resolvers are fairly robust and can wriggle out of some problems however pehaps it is odd cases like this (involving misconfiguration along the way) that unearth the legacy of CNAMEs.
Quote
Could be that we could get around the problem with a config change but I'm not well versed enough to delve into the inner workings of our current set-up. Did do a spot of Googling but after ten mins or so, the closest I could find was this.

I'm only familiar with BIND however I too did some Googling and it was clear there were lots of issues surrounding PowerDNS and CNAMEs but the nuances were such that it was difficult to spot any patterns. It has to be said, however, that similar searches for BIND and CNAMEs produces no less confusion!
Mathew
MJN
Pro
Posts: 1,318
Thanks: 161
Fixes: 5
Registered: ‎26-08-2010

Re: Is there an issue with Plusnet DNS tonight?

Quote from: jelv
Nobody has posted a suggestion as to how I got the results I did in Reply #3 where three of the Plusnet DNS servers answered Non-existent domain and one answered with the correct IP!

The variation of response will have been down to the variation of knowledge and perspective of each server. In particular, those servers that had no prior knowledge of anything related to these domains will have fallen into the trap, however the server that provided a positive result was likely able to because it already had cached either the A record(s) for web6.e4education.co.uk or the NS records for e4education.co.uk. The cached records will have allowed it to provide, or find, the answer and thus not be affected by the misconfigured server at IFL.
Mathew