From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 16 15:49:58 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E27D8BA9 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 15:49:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gtodd@bellanet.org) Received: from mail-ie0-f181.google.com (mail-ie0-f181.google.com [209.85.223.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF6B327E8 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 15:49:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f181.google.com with SMTP id ar20so1597483iec.26 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:49:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=U71djB6Qw6mPdCn0q41AIbsIqzk53fZLT/tPP+9gea0=; b=LOL/6gnLNjNpqaFgpJI6m/rlu8FBgDkDYPnVs9dgGAQCx6DB9GrrW8ZtSd1tLgLfVR aMYJCirACGIQbdWZtM6noJqhBIwK++bLDxghyErHQbGt1k7EvZ8gUxiiaQwd/gpkobYU PUOJ7KPf1Ax8pLQptnpn/5mjMwVMPbRpw2B/s9F5l3AMtvLuhHmnnTeE3pn1jt+Ojfz5 9iQwLelBsp2B+VHLLE+czuEKIJTDvV5nPc93FHpmIPPe38IiTBw7WmaVBR5Q5LN3l9qi +qPtMGUEXJyH8bw9DHUrcEkh3BQJxB3lgq4H1VN/3W2Pf6x/GH3aUpAE2fV9a8y6vHKV X2ng== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlXKFcMJ6Lx+2oMa7qVnIyKw2iZct78T2ANHto7MJEb6jGFrAmIYu3lOo8bsA3/OELcSNLw X-Received: by 10.43.80.67 with SMTP id zt3mr2273761icb.23.1381938591889; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:49:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.72] (CPE0080c8f208a5-CM001371173cf8.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com. [99.246.61.82]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id x5sm3890379iga.6.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 16 Oct 2013 08:49:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 11:53:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Graham Todd X-X-Sender: gtodd@ninga.iciti.internal To: Daniel Kalchev Subject: Re: What happened to nslookup? In-Reply-To: <525E600B.1010505@digsys.bg> Message-ID: References: <0E.82.01315.25778525@cdptpa-oedge03> <20131011221302.GH1611@albert.catwhisker.org> <54.9B.16944.480B8525@cdptpa-oedge02> <20131012022825.GJ1611@albert.catwhisker.org> <525B3F33.4030103@freebsd.org> <525E600B.1010505@digsys.bg> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 15:49:58 -0000 On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Daniel Kalchev wrote: > > On 16.10.13 08:42, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> >> nslookup(1) was deprecated about a decade ago because it often provides >> misleading results when used for DNS troubleshooting. It generally >> works fine for simply turning a name to an address or vice-versa. >> >> People should really use host(1) for simple lookups. It provides the >> same information and does it in a manner that will not cause >> misdirection when things are broken. > > Of course, host(1) is not a replacement for nslookup(1). > > nslookup is interactive, while host is not. This makes for a big > difference in many usage scenarios. The version of nslookup on FreeBSD systems I've used had no command line history or editing (even ntpdc has this now), gave results that were not always in line with other tools (ldns, drill, host etc.), and to do a host lookup inside the nslookup shell you had to type ... "host" :-)