--XUmrTyVHrg2/ImRG
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Michael,
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 02:24:04AM -0600, Michael Corliss wrote:
> The hostname is ilovephilosophy.com. It'd be great if it were just noise,
> but could it show the old IP with nslookup if it had actually changed?
Probably not, but I wanted to be sure.
Let's see what's going on then:
$ dig +noall +answer +auth +comments -t a ilovephilosophy.com
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 55221
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 3, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; ANSWER SECTION:
ilovephilosophy.com. 86365 IN A 212.13.195.254
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
ilovephilosophy.com. 86365 IN NS a.authns.bitfolk.com.
ilovephilosophy.com. 86365 IN NS c.authns.bitfolk.com.
ilovephilosophy.com. 86365 IN NS b.authns.bitfolk.com.
So yes, it seems DNS holds your old IP address.
Nameservers for this domain?:
$ dig +short -t ns ilovephilosophy.com
c.authns.bitfolk.com.
a.authns.bitfolk.com.
b.authns.bitfolk.com.
Only BitFolk.
What's the address record at each one, and your own server?:
$ for n in {a,b,c}.authns.bitfolk.com 85.119.83.254; do echo ${n}:; dig=
+short -t a ilovephilosophy.com @${n}; done
a.authns.bitfolk.com:
212.13.195.254
b.authns.bitfolk.com:
212.13.195.254
c.authns.bitfolk.com:
212.13.195.254
85.119.83.254:
212.13.195.254
Your server has 212.13.195.254; not a BitFolk issue.
If I go to
http://85.119.83.254/ then it looks like it's working.
So, your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to make your
nameserver at 85.119.83.254 return the correct address record for
ilovephilosophy.com and
www.ilovephilosophy.com.
That will involve a zone update, which BitFolk's servers should then
pick up.
You can test from another unix box like this:
dig +short -t a ilovephilosophy.com @85.119.83.254
I have repressed all memories of how to check this under Windows using
nslookup.
Do let the list know if you have any problems.
Cheers,
Andy
--=20
"I'm /extremely/ miffed about today's events and in my quest to try to make
you understand the level of my unhappiness, I'm likely to use an awful lot
of what we would call /violent sexual imagery/ and I just wanted to check
that neither of you would be terribly offended by that." =E2=80=94 Malcolm=
Tucker
--XUmrTyVHrg2/ImRG
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline
