Olin Lathrop wrote:
>> I want to say it was DNS propagation issues, but when I looked into it
>> yesterday, the URL www.findchips.com got me to the new site, but the
>> IP that the URL resolved to (via ping and whois tools), got me the
>> old one.
>>
>> I don't remember enough about how the internet works to come up with
>> an explanation that would make sense.
>
> This is just a wild guess, but it might have been a TTL issue.  The DNS
> records were switched, but the old one gave out a fairly long TTL value s=
o
> stayed valid in various caches.  Whether or not you got the old or new on=
e
> then dependended on which DNS server you asked, and whether it had the ol=
d
> one still cached with a valid remaining lifetime, or didn't and therefore
> had to ask the official DNS server for that domain.
>
> Usually you set the TTL value low then wait for all the old longer leases=
=20
> to
> expire before switching DNS entries, for exactly this reason.  Or if it's
> just a web site, you can keep the new site a identical copy of the old on=
e
> until the last possible old DNS lease expires.  Apparently these guys did
> neither.

How does this theory account for the fact that the IP that the URL resolved=
=20
to, pointed to the old site, while if you entered the URL in the browser, i=
t=20
went to the new site?

Vitaliy=20

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.