Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with OpenID
Advertise on LowEndTalk.com

In this Discussion

DNS Checking Tool Feedback

DNS Checking Tool Feedback

vitalievitalie Member
edited February 2013 in General

Hi,

My name is Vitalie Cherpec, I'm developing a DNS checking tool (http://www.dnsinspect.com/). I've migrated this tool from Ruby on Rails + EventMachine to Go (to save resources, now it runs very smoothly on a small VPS :)).

In this version I've added support for IPv6, although the project is covered by unit tests. I need more testing to catch corner cases, also my English it's not brilliant if you see something stupid let me know :). If you have a few seconds to look at I'll be grateful.

Thanks, Vitalie

Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • Hey Vitalie

    Very nice site :)

    Are you sure the SPF check is working correctly? It's displaying "WARNING: Domain doesn't have SPF record" for the domains i've tested although they have SPF records.

  • Looks pretty sweet :-) Good job!

    Thanked by 1BlazeMuis
  • @gsrdgrdghd said: Are you sure the SPF check is working correctly? It's displaying "WARNING: Domain doesn't have SPF record" for the domains i've tested although they have SPF records.

    The SPF records show for my domain names, though.

  • Awmusic12635Awmusic12635 Member, Provider

    Looks great

    Subnet Labs, LLC Contact Us Deploy to: Seattle, Dallas or NYC
    Impact VPS | Cloud Servers | Storage Servers | Impact Shared | Shared Hosting

  • IshaqIshaq Member, Provider

    Wow, very nice.

    You could do with a logo perhaps?

    [BudgetNode] DDoS Protected. 7 Locations (US/EU). Check out our latest offer!
  • Very cool tool. Couldn't see any issues with it.

  • @gsrdgrdghd said: Are you sure the SPF check is working correctly? It's displaying "WARNING: Domain doesn't have SPF record" for the domains i've tested although they have SPF records

    Let me check. Your SPF configuration is stored in TXT records or SPF records?

  • onepoundonepound Member, Provider

    Awesome tool.

    SPF working fine from the sites I have tested on it.

    Agree with ishaq, nice logo would do wonders for this site Maybe some of the creative people here could help you with that.

    OnePoundWebHostingUK XEN VPSPV & HVM
    UK Shared & Reseller HostingDomains - Nominet TAG HolderUK Ltd Company, Established 2006
  • @Ishaq said: You could do with a logo perhaps? @onepound said: Agree with ishaq, nice logo would do wonders for this site

    I'll consider using a logo & favicon. Thanks!

  • curtisgcurtisg Banned
    edited February 2013

    @vitalie are you sure you made that tool? I could of sworn I saw the exact same tool with the exact same features for sale on http://codecanyon.net/

    But it does look nice

  • Looks very good @vitalie! Compared to some other dns check tools I have yours is easier to read.

  • BradNDBradND Member
    edited February 2013

    @curtisg I think people actually code stuff rather than announce projects/steal snippets * Ahem *

    No longer with ND

  • @vitalie very nice. only annoying thing during job running is meta refresh of entire browser.

    Please change and use jquery polling so it's a nice/seamless experience.

    Otherwise from some small formatting I think it's very nice, possibly superior to intodns.com

    Retired!

  • @curtisg said: @vitalie are you sure you made that tool?

    Oh, I do remember very well how I've spent my evenings in the last 2 months. :) Yes, I've built it, I've made it to be:

    • scalable
    • as fast as possible (checks are running concurrently)
    • very efficient (cpu light + few KB per worker)
    • persistent reports (permanent links to old reports)
    • complete checks
    • smart error handling
    • IPv6 support
    • fast website ...
    • etc

    My Todo list is still big. :) Sorry, I can't find anything on that website related to my tool.

  • gsrdgrdghdgsrdgrdghd Member
    edited February 2013

    @vitalie said: Your SPF configuration is stored in TXT records or SPF records?

    In SPF records, they are the records for Google Apps

  • One point to think about - returning a temporary error (450) does not mean that the mail server does not accept emails for postmaster. It's just greylisting (postgrey).

    -

  • And one more thing - don't see why mail server greeting should contain the hostname. I mean you could use the same mail server for many domains.

    -

  • very nice kudos to @vitalie bookmarked

  • DamianDamian Member
    edited February 2013

    @vitalie nice tool!

    I especially liked the serial number check section:

    image

    I don't like how a lack of AAAA records is a "warning" and not an "info" or something similar: image image

    image

    I don't understand this section:

    image

    The tool states that our mail server does not offer its host name in it's greeting, but it does? image

    telnet cpanel1.ipxcore.com 25
    Trying 96.8.112.82...
    Connected to cpanel1.ipxcore.com.
    Escape character is '^]'.
    220-cpanel1.ipxcore.com ESMTP Exim 4.80 #2 Tue, 12 Feb 2013 08:48:17 -0500
    220-We do not authorize the use of this system to transport unsolicited,
    220 and/or bulk e-mail.
    EHLO testdomain.com
    250-cpanel1.ipxcore.com Hello carbon.ipxcore.com [198.144.190.10]
    250-SIZE 52428800
    250-8BITMIME
    250-PIPELINING
    250-AUTH PLAIN LOGIN
    250-STARTTLS
    250 HELP
    quit
    221 cpanel1.ipxcore.com closing connection
    Connection closed by foreign host.
    

    ===================== Otherwise, a very nice tool, and I will be using it in the future. Thank you!

  • @unused said: Please change and use jquery polling so it's a nice/seamless experience.

    Good suggestion, but I have to avoid jQuery until the mobile version is ready. Thank you!

    @gsrdgrdghd said: In SPF records, they are the records for Google Apps

    I've deployed a new version with the fix. Thank you!

    @rds100 said: One point to think about - returning a temporary error (450)

    Yes, it's a temporarily error. I'll have to adjust the message. Thank you!

  • @Damian said: The tool states that our mail server does not offer its host name in it's greeting, but it does?

    I guess it means that there is a discrepancy between the name it was expecting ("ipxcore.com") and the name it actually got ("cpanel1.ipxcore.com")

  • Great tool, bookmarked.

    @Damian said: I don't like how a lack of AAAA records is a "warning" and not an "info" or something similar:

    I'll agree with that- I don't see it as a must to have IPv6 records for my name servers currently.

    Do not click this link.
  • @rds100 said: And one more thing - don't see why mail server greeting should contain the hostname. I mean you could use the same mail server for many domains.

    This warning helps to spot SPAM issues (if you are using this server to send emails) with HELO/EHLO & reverse PTR checks (http://tldp.org/HOWTO/html_single/Spam-Filtering-for-MX/#smtpchecks). It should say that this mail server claims to be B and I've made reverse PTR checks for A in previous section. I have to put a more meaningful message. Thank you!

  • @rds100, said:

    And one more thing - don't see why mail server greeting should contain the hostname. I mean you could use the same mail server for many domains.

    Highly agree with this.

    @vitalie, very nice!

  • @Damian said: I don't like how a lack of AAAA records is a "warning" and not an "info" or something similar: @Andre said: I'll agree with that- I don't see it as a must to have IPv6 records for my name servers currently.

    Yes, INFO instead WARN is more appropriate here.

    @Damian said: I don't understand this section:

    Interesting configuration. :) I'm checking the distribution of the IP addresses across multiple class C networks. You have two name servers with multiple addresses which are shared between those servers. I have to adjust this test. Thank you!

  • love the tools and design. How about adding article about how to fix that problem to which mark as Warn?

    Let's bet which dot-name will collapse first ;)

  • gbshousegbshouse Member, Provider
    edited February 2013

    Nice tool. Two things: - can you add the checkbox so it will be possible to skip the Mail/Web part, - "Name Servers Versions" for our domain used in this test (r4ns.info) returns

    WARNING: Name servers software versions are exposed: 176.124.112.100: "Rage4 DNS - http://www.rage4.com" 176.124.113.200: "Rage4 DNS - http://www.rage4.com" 2a00:dd80:fb80::100: "Rage4 DNS - http://www.rage4.com" 2a00:dd80:fb80::200: "Rage4 DNS - http://www.rage4.com"

    Maybe it's possible to move it from Warning to Info or parse the response and detect non standard responses.

  • nice tool =D added to my FAV tools.

  • @vitalie Thanks for adding another tool to my toolbox. I really appreciate good DNS tools. I'll post my reactions/comments once I've had a chance to play around with it a bit.

  • @tommy said: love the tools and design. How about adding article about how to fix that problem to which mark as

    @gbshouse said: - can you add the checkbox so it will be possible to skip the Mail/Web part, - "Name Servers Versions" for our domain used in this test (r4ns.info) returns

    I've added your requests to my Todo list. Now, I'm going to bed. :) Thank you!

  • @vitalie like this a lot. Don't go all subscriber on us this is beautifully efficient!

  • RaidLogicRaidLogic Member
    edited February 2013

    Hello,

    This is script open source? Or do you plan to sell this?

    Cheers

    RaidLogic.NET - Linux/Windows VPS in multiple locations, starting as low as $9.95/year.
  • Seems similar to something I've always used, IntoDNS.

  • I'm lov'in it.

    Would be nice to see the site/template as being responsive (http://dfcb.github.com/Responsivator/?site=www.dnsinspect.com) or possibly a mobile-friendly version.

    All the best!

  • @RaidLogic said: This is script open source? Or do you plan to sell this?

    No, it's not open source and I don't plan to sell it, from 2008 till now I've received many offers to sell it. :)

    @Roph said: Seems similar to something I've always used, IntoDNS.

    There are many similar tools on the web, they all got inspiration from the defunct dnsreport.com. My focus with this tool is:

    • quality
    • speed
    • robustness
    • check every aspect
    • avoid false positives
  • @Isaiah one up for that..I am REALLY getting tired of major sites not using responsive design :(

  • The tool is great and I can imagine it took a LOT of work.

    Since you asked for constructive criticism I'd like to point out one shortcoming:

    @vitalie said:

    Interesting configuration. :) I'm checking the distribution of the IP addresses across multiple class C networks. You have two name servers with multiple addresses which are shared between those servers. I have to adjust this test. Thank you!

    IP addresses aren't divided into A,B, C classes anymore. There is something called CIDR now. So you should change that message.

  • I like it. It looks good and it is fast. Do you have any before/after performance metrics for the rails --> go switch?

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
    https://raymii.org - https://cipherli.st
  • @Abdussamad - yes but with smaller subnets, usually those subnets on the same /24 will all be routed throuh the same Dist. Router

  • @Isaiah said: Would be nice to see the site/template as being responsive (http://dfcb.github.com/Responsivator/?site=www.dnsinspect.com) or possibly a mobile-friendly version.

    @natestamm said: @Isaiah one up for that..I am REALLY getting tired of major sites not using responsive design :(

    Indeed it needs a mobile version/responsive design to avoid scrolling. I'll start implementing a mobile skin after finishing current tasks, although it looks decent on my Nexus 4 and old Nokia mobile.

    @Raymii said: I like it. It looks good and it is fast. Do you have any before/after performance metrics for the rails --> go switch?

    I'll write a post in the blog regarding this architecture change, the biggest win is memory usage & code simplicity, memory went down from 128MB/worker to a few KB. :)

  • gbshousegbshouse Member, Provider
    edited February 2013

    @vitalie - maybe you can consider API or something similar so it will be possible to integrate your service with 3rd party? and maybe add something similar to http://www.whatsmydns.net/ so it will be possible to run diagnostics and propagation?

  • @twain said: yes but with smaller subnets, usually those subnets on the same /24 will all be routed throuh the same Dist. Router

    You seem to have misunderstood me. I am sure it is a good idea to have nameservers in different subnets. I am not against that. What I am complaining about is that the terminology is all wrong. There is no such thing as a C class network anymore.

  • Right but the term still exists, and of course class C networks still exist.

  • After the modifications the tool looks very good, i like it :) Now i just have to try to remember the name and use it.

    -

  • hugheseyhughesey Member
    edited February 2013

    maybe you can consider API or something similar so it will be possible to integrate your service with 3rd party? and maybe add something similar to http://www.whatsmydns.net/ so it will be possible to run diagnostics and propagation?

    http://ViewDNS.info has an API with a bunch of free tools that could work for you?

    ViewDNS.info - Your one source for DNS related tools and information.
  • @Damian said: I don't understand this section:

    I've deployed a new version, check it now.

    @gbshouse said: - "Name Servers Versions" for our domain used in this test (r4ns.info) returns

    Fixed.

    @rds100 said: One point to think about - returning a temporary error (450) does not mean that the mail server does not accept emails for postmaster. It's just greylisting (postgrey

    Fixed.

    @Damian said: I don't like how a lack of AAAA records is a "warning" and not an "info" or something similar:

    Fixed.

    @gbshouse said: maybe you can consider API or something similar so it will be possible to integrate your service with 3rd party?

    I'm following the KISS principle, I love simplicity. I'm trying to avoid features which complicates the interface or code. Sure, I'll consider adding API support if there will be enough requests. :) Thank you!

  • @vitalie +1 on the API

  • As already said via PM, there is something that isn't very stable in the tool. I tested 2 domains, both use the same DNS servers and both use the same mailserver. On one of the domains it says it can't access one of the mailservers, while on the other it can access them both. And on one of the domains it says that a DNS server can't be accessed in ipv6 while it can do that for the other domain. I tested and retested it several times. Domainnames were given in PM.

Sign In or Register to comment.