Re: Fresh (non cached) dig

2009-01-05 Thread Jeremy C. Reed
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009, Stephen Ward wrote: > On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:24:04 +, Chris Thompson wrote: > > > On Jan 5 2009, John Wobus wrote: > > > >>[...] There is no nameserver > >>operation > >>that dig could do to tell a ca

Re: Fresh (non cached) dig

2009-01-05 Thread Stephen Ward
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:24:04 +, Chris Thompson wrote: > On Jan 5 2009, John Wobus wrote: > >>[...] There is no nameserver >>operation >>that dig could do to tell a caching nameserver to act differently for >>one query. Y

Re: Fresh (non cached) dig

2009-01-05 Thread Chris Thompson
On Jan 5 2009, John Wobus wrote: [...] There is no nameserver operation that dig could do to tell a caching nameserver to act differently for one query. You could clear the nameserver's cache, or even clear the one name you are interested in out of the cache.

RE: Fresh (non cached) dig

2009-01-05 Thread Todd Snyder
I've been doing some testing lately on query times. What I did was create a new zone and create a * record within it. Then, from a shell, I do "dig @server $RANDOM.test.testdomain.com". For more randomness, you can combine: "dig @server $RANDOM.$RANDOM.test.testdomain.com" That's how I've wor

Re: Fresh (non cached) dig

2009-01-05 Thread John Wobus
I'm imagining you want a way to make dig act like the caching nameserver and do what it would do and show you the answer. dig +trace does something similar to this. There is no nameserver operation that dig could do to tell a caching nameserver to act differently for one query. You could clear

Re: Fresh (non cached) dig

2009-01-05 Thread Stephen Ward
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:16:35 -0800, wes wrote: > --===3579383764054783402== Content-Type: > multipart/alternative; > boundary="=_Part_21674_19533272.1230941795123" > > --=_Part_21674_19533272.1230941795123 Content-Type: text/plain; > charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-E

Re: Fresh (non cached) dig

2009-01-04 Thread Doug Barton
Stephen Ward wrote: > For all my attempts to read the manual on DIG I can't find a way to do > something really simple. > > Is there a way to dig a domain name so even if the results are in cache, > it will ignore these and re-read them? It's really from a testing > perspective I'm looking at t

Re: Fresh (non cached) dig

2009-01-02 Thread wes
If you're referring to your local system's cache, you can bypass this by specifying a DNS server for dig to query. use @dns.server.domain or @4.2.2.2(for example) for this. If you're referring to the cache on the server you're trying to query, sorry, that's beyond your control, unless you have roo