Seems weird to me, the router would need to do deep packet inspection of DNS and selectively block specific ones. It feels more like you’ve set up your DNS to do forwarding instead of resolution. Can you post a network diagram and the DNS config?

It’s a gas where the chemical reaction of the combustion has produced enough energy to heat it up to a temperature where it emits visible light. Kind of like a glowing piece of metal, but in gas form.

It’s a mixture of black body radiation and individual spectral lines.

The spectral lines happen when electrons fall from a high to a low energy state and the energy difference is emitted as light.

Black body radiation describes the fact that everything constantly emits electromagnetic radiation (=light). But what kind of light depends on the temperature with colder bodies like us humans emitting infrared whereas warmer bodies like the sun emit visible light. That is also why light temperature is a thing and the unit is Kelvin.

Here are some graphs and stuff: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/648273/does-fire-emit-black-body-radiation

Do tcpdump host $server instead. Otherwise you will only see the request (the response goes to a different port).

Just to be sure you do dig A @server $domain (with the “A”) and can confirm the following

SERVER is your server

;; ANSWER SECTION is empty (or doesn’t exist)

;; AUTHORITY SECTION mentions your local DNS server

Also check

dig NS @server $domain

Is your server in the answer section?

Here is how I would diagnose (I’m assuming you have Linux / WSL on a client)

1. Check the DNS record is actually set (yes do it again)
2. Do these steps on the client:
3. dig $domain check which server answered
4. dig a $domain should give a record
5. dig a $domain @server to make sure you’re querying the right server

If none work, probably network issue (DNS boind to wrong IP, firewall, etc)

If 3 and 5 work but 4 doesn’t, your DNS isn’t authorative.

If only 5 works DNS settings on the client is wrong.

Its very unlikely for these reasons:

• limited lifetime
• we have already seen volcanic eruptions which put a lot of SO2 into the stratosphere, and thet did not cause an ice age, so it’s clearly fine if we don’t put too much

Anyway, that’s what research is for.

Thank you, I deleted my post so as to not share false info.

deleted by creator

We should put research into stratospheric aerosol injection. We need an insurance to limit climate change if emissions don’t go down fast enough.

We know it works, and it’s at least not catastrophically unsafe as we have already done it with container ships, and seen it happen at bigger scale with volcanic eruptions.

This is a good start:

https://european-alternatives.eu/

Mostly moving to hetzner. It’s a bit rough around the edges but works.

One big thing missing is there is no good and affordable WAF. Myra is good but costs at least 10k/month.

I am almost done migrating away from all US businesses as a result of this. I am even drinking freeway cola 😅

I work in IT as a freelance DevOps/Cloud engineer and am advising all my clients to migrate away from AWS etc.

Even sold most of S&P 500 and reinvested into an all-world ex-US ETF.