From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 27 20:49:48 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C1916A46D for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:49:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C83513C47E for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:49:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20AC495EB; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 15:49:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:49:47 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= In-Reply-To: <86myqrxaw3.fsf@ds4.des.no> Message-ID: <20080127204825.J71547@fledge.watson.org> References: <86d4rn1kln.fsf@ds4.des.no> <86sl0jywii.fsf@ds4.des.no> <86abmryun9.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20080127184656.B60477@fledge.watson.org> <86myqrxaw3.fsf@ds4.des.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="621616949-873721053-1201466987=:71547" Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: resolver change? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:49:48 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --621616949-873721053-1201466987=:71547 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Sun, 27 Jan 2008, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > Robert Watson writes: > >> A casual glance suggests no pertinent changes in that timeframe -- howev= er,=20 >> were you just updating your kernel, or also userspace, and in particular= ,=20 >> libc? > > No, this is the weird thing. > > I'm starting to think I'm imagining it all... > > But this *definitely* worked correctly on January 13, and *definitely*=20 > didn't work correctly on January 21, nor does it work correctly today. > >> What happens if you back out getaddrinfo.c:1.86: > > I've been running with that version of getaddrinfo.c since long before it= =20 > stopped working. On the grounds that paranoia is clearly better, my suggestion at this point= =20 would be to run tcpdump between the caching resolver and ntpd and see what = is=20 actually going on the wire. The name server should be rotating them in rep= ly,=20 and it would be good to confirm that it's doing that. It would also be goo= d=20 to check that it's looking up what you think it's looking up, and indeed, w= hat=20 it should be looking at. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge --621616949-873721053-1201466987=:71547--