Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Wp388-0001Pu-4g for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 26 May 2014 22:12:28 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender) client-ip=80.91.229.3; envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org; helo=plane.gmane.org; Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1Wp386-00081h-Pz for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 26 May 2014 22:12:28 +0000 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Wp37x-0002S6-Cr for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 27 May 2014 00:12:17 +0200 Received: from f053012018.adsl.alicedsl.de ([78.53.12.18]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 May 2014 00:12:17 +0200 Received: from andreas by f053012018.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 May 2014 00:12:17 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net From: Andreas Schildbach Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 00:12:05 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20140523221726.GA30143@petertodd.org> <20140526163753.GA18693@petertodd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: f053012018.adsl.alicedsl.de User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 In-Reply-To: <20140526163753.GA18693@petertodd.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 X-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [80.91.229.3 listed in list.dnswl.org] -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record 1.1 DKIM_ADSP_ALL No valid author signature, domain signs all mail -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1Wp386-00081h-Pz Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] testnet-seed.bitcoin.petertodd.org is up again X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 22:12:28 -0000 You're very quick to point at others. Especially since they run software that had the time to mature for about 30 years, and the protocol didn't really change since then... The last time it didn't work, the bug -- non RFC-conformance -- was on the bitcoin seeders side. ISPs do weird things with DNS, but usually they stay within the RFC. Anyway, without logs we don't have a chance to debug this issue. Any chance you could add simple logging to the seeder? DNS via HTTP? Never heard of that, at least it sounds weird as well. On 05/26/2014 06:37 PM, Peter Todd wrote: > On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 09:12:10PM +0200, Andreas Schildbach wrote: >> Thanks for looking at the issue. >> >> Unfortunately, it still fails for me: >> >> $ nslookup testnet-seed.bitcoin.petertodd.org >> Server: 127.0.1.1 >> Address: 127.0.1.1#53 >> >> ** server can't find testnet-seed.bitcoin.petertodd.org: SERVFAIL >> >> Like I said, can you look at the logfiles how the requests arrive? > > There are no logfiles for DNS requests. > > I just checked on EC2 and my cellphone internet connection here in Tel > Aviv; both work fine. My best guess is that your DNS resolver locally or > at your ISP is unable to deal with the fact that the second DNS seed > serving the domain testnet-seed.bitcoin.petertodd.org happens to be down > right now. Note that some ISP's appear to both run buggy DNS servers, > and redirect traffic meant to go to Google's 8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 DNS > servers to their own servers. > > I'd suggest that someone setup an alternate HTTP(S) based DNS seed for > protocol redundency. > >> What particular thing did you fix? It would be good to know for future >> outages. > > Dunno exactly. It appeared to be running fine when I logged into the > machine, but for whatever reason DNS requests just weren't getting > resolved. Restarted and it was ok again. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > The best possible search technologies are now affordable for all companies. > Download your FREE open source Enterprise Search Engine today! > Our experts will assist you in its installation for $59/mo, no commitment. > Test it for FREE on our Cloud platform anytime! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=145328191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >