Howdy, Stranger!

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


DNS Checking Tool Feedback - Page 2
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

2

Comments

  • @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

  • 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?

  • @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, Host Rep
    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?

  • @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.

  • @vitalie said: I've deployed a new version, check it now.

    Looks great! Thank you!

  • Kudos to @vitalie

    I actively using your site for the past 3 days.
    I will let you know if something stupid happen.

    Thanks.

  • @dirk said: As already said via PM, there is something that isn't very stable in the tool.

    I'll take a look at your configuration today. Thank you!

  • DeanDean Member
    edited February 2013

    Wuhoo! Getting an "A" rating from the report.

    However if I re-run the test, sometimes the MX doesn't come back 100% - it complains about something to do with the Google Apps MX.

  • @dirk said: As already said via PM, there is something that isn't very stable in the tool. ...

    I've just released a new version which addresses Dirk's problem.

    @DeanClinton said: However if I re-run the test, sometimes the MX doesn't come back 100% - it complains about something to do with the Google Apps MX.

    Sorry, I didn't understood the problem. Please, help me understand it, give me more details. :) Thank you!

  • @vitalie - it seems to be working ok now :)

  • Nice job. Well done.

  • You need to add support for DNSSEC!

  • Great Tool..

  • I like this tool.

    It reminded me I need to redo my mail server.

Sign In or Register to comment.