3 ms·

> This does the exact same thing so it will always give you the right answer, but the output is a bit confusing to read so I’m a bit more hesitant to recommend

by zokier 5y ago

> This does the exact same thing so it will always give you the right answer, but the output is a bit confusing to read so I’m a bit more hesitant to recommend it. I constantly get indications that dig is this really powerful tool, but I must say I always find its output baffling. Granted I'm not expert on DNS but I know the basics and its still pretty damn arcane. I usually can decipher it in the end (assuming nothing too weird is going on) but I can't shake the feeling that my understanding is being obstructed by the tool here.

winthrowe 5y ago
Trace output was easier to read in the days when everybody trusted and there was no security. Try reading this, with just the tool output, A and NS records, like the old days: dig +trace jvns.ca | egrep ";|IN\s+A|IN\s+NS\s"
jlgaddis 5y ago
> I always find its output baffling. I'm gonna fathom a guess that this is likely because you aren't aware that tha output returned by dig is (by default) valid BIND zonefile format/syntax, and/or you aren't very familiar with the BIND zonefile format/syntax itself. Regardless, though, dig has a number of query options you might like to use that will suppress much of the (redundant and/or unwanted) output that's shown by default, such as "+noadditional", "+noauthority", "+nocmd", "+nocomments", "+noquestion", "+norrcomments", or "+nostats". You can even put all of those those (on a single line) in a "$HOME/.digrc" file and they'll be used automatically everytime you run "dig". See dig(1) for details. Alternatively, you might find it easier to simply get into the habit of using (only) the "+short" query option everytime you run "dig" (or put that in .digrc). Just at the output of these queries, for example: $ dig +short ns example.com $ dig +short a google.com The output quite possibly contains exactly what you want to know and nothing more -- including, especially, all of the extraneous output that often just gets in the way and leaves you constantly baffled!

by zokier 5y ago

winthrowe 5y ago

Trace output was easier to read in the days when everybody trusted and there was no security. Try reading this, with just the tool output, A and NS records, like the old days: dig +trace jvns.ca | egrep ";|IN\s+A|IN\s+NS\s"

jlgaddis 5y ago

> I always find its output baffling. I'm gonna fathom a guess that this is likely because you aren't aware that tha output returned by dig is (by default) valid BIND zonefile format/syntax, and/or you aren't very familiar with the BIND zonefile format/syntax itself. Regardless, though, dig has a number of query options you might like to use that will suppress much of the (redundant and/or unwanted) output that's shown by default, such as "+noadditional", "+noauthority", "+nocmd", "+nocomments", "+noquestion", "+norrcomments", or "+nostats". You can even put all of those those (on a single line) in a "$HOME/.digrc" file and they'll be used automatically everytime you run "dig". See dig(1) for details. Alternatively, you might find it easier to simply get into the habit of using (only) the "+short" query option everytime you run "dig" (or put that in .digrc). Just at the output of these queries, for example: $ dig +short ns example.com $ dig +short a google.com The output quite possibly contains exactly what you want to know and nothing more -- including, especially, all of the extraneous output that often just gets in the way and leaves you constantly baffled!