[Pdns-users] experience upgrade 2.9 > 3.3.1

[Willem]

Oops, celebrated too early. Today, I recorded another unexpected NXDOMAIN
reply:

13:37:32.372046 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 24351, offset 0, flags [DF], proto
UDP (17), length 69)
    10.1.2.39.9903 > 10.1.1.60.53: [udp sum ok] 553+ A?
dbint039487.c1.internal. (41)
13:37:32.373650 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP
(17), length 152)
    10.1.1.60.53 > 10.1.2.39.9903: [udp sum ok] 553 NXDomain*- q: A?
dbint039487.c1.internal. 1/1/0 dbint039487.c1.internal. CNAME
database33.c1.internal. ns: internal. SOA nsa.byte.nl. hostmaster.byte.nl.
2009121500 10800 3600 604800 3600 (124)
13:37:32.373660 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP
(17), length 152)
    10.1.1.60.53 > 10.1.2.39.9903: [udp sum ok] 553 NXDomain*- q: A?
dbint039487.c1.internal. 1/1/0 dbint039487.c1.internal. CNAME
database33.c1.internal. ns: internal. SOA nsa.byte.nl. hostmaster.byte.nl.
2009121500 10800 3600 604800 3600 (124)

(also, am not sure where the dupe reply came from, perhaps because we're
using bonding and tcpdump listened on 'any').

Config & database rows @
https://gist.github.com/gwillem/8686d364e2d9cad92c62

Any suggestions how to debug this?


On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Chris <lists at shthead.com> wrote:

>  Hi,
>
> For the subdomain wildcard problem you have, see my post here:
> http://mailman.powerdns.com/pipermail/pdns-users/2014-May/010652.html
>
> And Peter's follow up here:
> http://mailman.powerdns.com/pipermail/pdns-users/2014-May/010653.html
>
> I believe that might be related?
>
> I upgraded from 2.9 to 3.3 a while back with no real hassles (roughly 7m
> records in 4 instances), only thing to watch out for was the schema
> changes. I import zones from servers running cPanel (using zone2sql on the
> named files) and that didn't require any changes which was nice.
>
> Chris
>
>
> On 11/07/2014 6:08 PM, Willem wrote:
>
> FYI, here are my notes from upgrading our 1M records mysql-based setup
> from 2.9 to 3.3.1:
>
>  One nasty bug that was our reason to upgrade in the first place, is
> gone. We used to have 1 out of every million queries giving a false
> NXDOMAIN reply, not anymore. You could call us very happy ;)
>
>  A huge issue (for us) was the stricter database model. The new pdns
> requires every record to have the same domain_id as the corresponding SOA
> record. Specifically, this means that an A record for sub.domain.tld will
> not work anymore, if a SOA record for sub.domain.tld with another domain_id
> exists. We had to rewrite quite a few procedures to comply with this new
> behaviour and run a periodic check on our database to see whether there are
> still processes that write the wrong domain_id's.
>
>  Another thing biting us, is that an A query for x.sub.dom.tld doesn't
> work anymore, given A records "*.dom.tld" and "sub.dom.tld". An A query for
> x.sub2.dom.tld does still work. We haven't fixed this yet. I've posted the
> details at https://gist.github.com/gwillem/6bbcf43545de6c25cf0e
>
>  All in all, the upgrade and fixing all dependencies was a lot of work (3
> weeks), but a big succes.
> Thanks for making powerdns!
>
>  Willem
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pdns-users mailing listPdns-users at mailman.powerdns.comhttp://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pdns-users mailing list
> Pdns-users at mailman.powerdns.com
> http://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/pdns-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.powerdns.com/pipermail/pdns-users/attachments/20140714/d463f97c/attachment-0001.html>