Howdy, Stranger!

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


DNS Checking Tool Feedback
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

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

«13

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, Host Rep

    Looks great

  • Wow, very nice.

    You could do with a logo perhaps?

  • 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?

  • 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.

  • @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 *

  • @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

  • @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")

  • RobertClarkeRobertClarke Member, Host Rep

    Wow, that's a nice tool. Great job!

  • 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.

  • @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!

  • jhjh Member

    Excellent work!

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

  • gbshousegbshouse Member, Host Rep
    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.

Sign In or Register to comment.