Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 17:47:40 +0900
From: Nobumichi Ozoe <Nobumichi.Ozoe@jp.yokogawa.com>
Subject: [dnstest:00035] Re: Got an issure regarding test case no. 53
To: PRAMENDRA SINGH <parma_it@rediffmail.com>
Cc: dnstest@tahi.org
Message-Id: <439D392C.8080909@jp.yokogawa.com>
In-Reply-To: <20051209054223.14996.qmail@webmail7.rediffmail.com>
References: <20051209054223.14996.qmail@webmail7.rediffmail.com>
X-Mail-Count: 00035

Hi,

Well you are talking about Tet No.53 Caching of dead server indication.

We wrote this test specification based on RFC2038 7.2 Dead / Unreachable Server 
(OPTIONAL). This function is OPTIONAL and furthermore for servers.
Then we think that we will delete this specification.

Anyway, thanks your opinion.

Best regards,

PRAMENDRA SINGH wrote:
> Hi
> 
> thanks for your reply.....  :-)
> well the way I have tested all caching related test cases are...
> 
> I'm running caching server locally....in the NUT....
> 
> So, (in this test case 55) whenever I give any query (for first time), 
> sends it to the TN...
> on receiving the reply...caches it ....now if I do the same query 2nd 
> time...
> it wont send to the TN...will resolve from its cache itself...
> Now as per this test case...first time we send the query A.example.com.
> but the server (TN) never replies...So next time (in the 3rd step) if we
> give the same query.....NUT wont get any information in its cache...
> so it will again send it to the TN.....
> 
> If it does not ...then (in general scenario) say I sent a query to the 
> server
> & dint get any reply...again I sent the same query to the same server...
> then as per this test scenario...my client should not send the query to 
> the saver..
> which I believe does not sound logical....
> 
> Moreover I donno how to maintain cache in the NUT without running 
> caching server....
> coz as per my knowledge...someone should be there who must take care of this
> cache...(say checking the TTL value)....which the dig utility can't do....
> 
> I hope I could explain u....
> 
> please comment...
> 
> 
> thanks & regards
> 
> Prem
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 Nobumichi.Ozoe@jp.yokogawa.com wrote :
>  >Hi,
>  >
>  >I can't understand that you said "how the NUT will cache it".
>  >Could you teach me your opinion?
>  >
>  >Best regards,
>  >
>  >________________________________
>  >
>  > From: PRAMENDRA SINGH [mailto:parma_it@rediffmail.com]
>  >Sent: 2005/12/08 (木) 13:06
>  >To: dnstest@tahi.org
>  >Cc: users@tahi.org
>  >Subject: [dnstest:00029] Got an issure regarding test case no. 53
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >Hi
>  >
>  >As per the new release(6th Dec) of DNS Client test cases
>  >I got an issue regarding test case no. 53.
>  >As per test sequence....
>  >
>  >1. NUT first sends query (A.example.com) to TN
>  >2. Server (TN) does not send response within 120 seconds...
>  >3. NUT must send query (A.example.com) to the TN..but it should not 
> reach the TN...
>  >NUT should be able to
>  >
>  >I got the doubt here in the 3rd step...If the server is not going to send
>  >any response then how the NUT will cache it...so that in the next time 
> (in the 3rd step)
>  >definitely the packet will go to the TN...
>  >
>  >Please let me know whether my analysis is right or wrong...
>  >
>  >Your comments are always valuable for me...
>  >
>  >thanks & regards
>  >
>  >Prem
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >  
> <http://adworks.rediff.com/cgi-bin/AdWorks/sigclick.cgi/www.rediff.com/signature-home.htm/1507191490@Middle5?PARTNER=3>
> 
> 
> 
> <http://adworks.rediff.com/cgi-bin/AdWorks/sigclick.cgi/www.rediff.com/signature-home.htm/1507191490@Middle5?PARTNER=3> 
> 


-- 
Nobumichi Ozoe
IPv6 Business
Network & Software Development Dept.
Yokogawa Electric Corporation
E-mail: Nobumichi.Ozoe@jp.yokogawa.com
URL: http://www.yokogawa.com/