1 個回答
- 最新
- 最多得票
- 最多評論
2
I would look again at your config in Route 53. I agree that there are no MX records showing publicly based on dig.
Once you update them in the Public Hosted Zone, you should be able to see them pretty much immediately using dig
against one of your specified name servers using the following syntax. In this syntax the @ sends the dig lookup to the specified host and since you are sending to the NS that you are updating in Route 53 this avoids any TTL caching and lets you look at the raw record.
dig tnpnews.in -t MX @ns-65.awsdns-08.com
You can substitute any of the AWS NS servers listed for the Public Hosted Zone after the @ symbol.
Hope this helps!
相關內容
- AWS 官方已更新 1 年前
- AWS 官方已更新 3 年前
Thanks for the response.
So, I tried with all of my NS servers with the command that you have suggested, but there is same out put for all (though the NS servers in each response are different, ofcourse ).
e.g. dig tnpnews.in -t MX @ns-1628.awsdns-11.co.uk
; <<>> DiG 9.10.6 <<>> tnpnews.in -t MX @ns-1628.awsdns-11.co.uk ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 34859 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 4096 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;tnpnews.in. IN MX
;; AUTHORITY SECTION: tnpnews.in. 900 IN SOA ns-1628.awsdns-11.co.uk. awsdns-hostmaster.amazon.com. 1 7200 900 1209600 86400
;; Query time: 5 msec ;; SERVER: 205.251.198.92#53(205.251.198.92) ;; WHEN: Thu Aug 24 12:14:14 IST 2023 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 126
Also, I have edited my post to include the Route53 Config.
Remove the '@.' from your MX entry record name. The record name should be 'tnpnews.in' just like your NS and SOA record names.
thanks, it has started showing up - does it mean I need to remove @ from the other places as well - actually the godaddy guys asked to do it this way.
Yes, I would remove the '@.' from each. I think that may have been something specific to GoDaddy's system however when you are putting in Route 53 that way you are actually creating a record for a subdomain called @ rather that the base domain.