Some names' own nameservers rotate their answers: github.com's nameservers answered 140.82.121.3 at one check and 140.82.121.4 at the next. As the README specifies, every such switch is a Record Change notification, and two nameservers answering differently at the same check is an Inconsistency notification. In the run, github.com and www.github.com produced notifications on almost every check for nothing that an owner would call a change. A name served this way (many large sites and CDNs) cannot be watched without a constant stream of alerts.
Options:
A. Keep the behaviour; the README says plainly that a name whose nameservers rotate their answers notifies on every rotation, so such names are better not watched.
B. Notify a record change only when a nameserver returns a value it has not returned within some recent window (for example 24 hours), and an inconsistency only when it lasts for two checks in a row. Quieter, but a real change back to a recent value would go unnoticed for that window.
C. Something else you prefer.
Recommendation: A for 1.0 (one README paragraph, no behaviour change, nothing hidden), and B or C as its own issue after 1.0 if you want rotating names to be watchable. Work continues on the other trial findings meanwhile; nothing waits on this.
Model: opus-5-5
Question for @sneak, from the trial run in https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/dnswatcher/issues/149.
Some names' own nameservers rotate their answers: `github.com`'s nameservers answered `140.82.121.3` at one check and `140.82.121.4` at the next. As the README specifies, every such switch is a Record Change notification, and two nameservers answering differently at the same check is an Inconsistency notification. In the run, `github.com` and `www.github.com` produced notifications on almost every check for nothing that an owner would call a change. A name served this way (many large sites and CDNs) cannot be watched without a constant stream of alerts.
Options:
- A. Keep the behaviour; the README says plainly that a name whose nameservers rotate their answers notifies on every rotation, so such names are better not watched.
- B. Notify a record change only when a nameserver returns a value it has not returned within some recent window (for example 24 hours), and an inconsistency only when it lasts for two checks in a row. Quieter, but a real change back to a recent value would go unnoticed for that window.
- C. Something else you prefer.
Recommendation: A for 1.0 (one README paragraph, no behaviour change, nothing hidden), and B or C as its own issue after 1.0 if you want rotating names to be watchable. Work continues on the other trial findings meanwhile; nothing waits on this.
Model: opus-5-5
clawbot
added this to the 1.0 milestone 2026-10-02 07:37:21 +02:00
sneak
was assigned by clawbot2026-10-02 07:37:21 +02:00
if the responses are changing then that is correct to notify. file an issue for a later improvement that allows an admin to disable this specific notification on a per-host basis.
if the responses are changing then that is correct to notify. file an issue for a later improvement that allows an admin to disable this specific notification on a per-host basis.
Behaviour kept; the README already says any observable change in a nameserver's response is notified. The per-name switch is filed as #255 on milestone 1.5.
Model: opus-5-5
Behaviour kept; the README already says any observable change in a nameserver's response is notified. The per-name switch is filed as https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/dnswatcher/issues/255 on milestone 1.5.
Model: opus-5-5
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Question for @sneak, from the trial run in #149.
Some names' own nameservers rotate their answers:
github.com's nameservers answered140.82.121.3at one check and140.82.121.4at the next. As the README specifies, every such switch is a Record Change notification, and two nameservers answering differently at the same check is an Inconsistency notification. In the run,github.comandwww.github.comproduced notifications on almost every check for nothing that an owner would call a change. A name served this way (many large sites and CDNs) cannot be watched without a constant stream of alerts.Options:
Recommendation: A for 1.0 (one README paragraph, no behaviour change, nothing hidden), and B or C as its own issue after 1.0 if you want rotating names to be watchable. Work continues on the other trial findings meanwhile; nothing waits on this.
Model: opus-5-5
if the responses are changing then that is correct to notify. file an issue for a later improvement that allows an admin to disable this specific notification on a per-host basis.
Behaviour kept; the README already says any observable change in a nameserver's response is notified. The per-name switch is filed as #255 on milestone 1.5.
Model: opus-5-5