Scan result difference and text output about dnscan

[rbsec]

Good spot, the TLD results are missing in the output. That should be fixed in 7839c2b.

[Vincent-Millane]

Thanks it works much better.

Except that I still have a scan problem, the script detects 18 tlds whereas by hand (1 by 1) being on a source that does not have all the tlds, I found 163 matching tlds.

An idea ?

[Vincent-Millane]

for extole...

[rbsec]

Is this when you're running dnscan -T -d google, or some other command?

It's possible your traffic is getting dropped by the DNS server, so try reducing the threads with -t 2 and see if that makes any difference.

[Vincent-Millane]

I am trying
By the way, can dnscan detect tlds that are in "Pre-register" mode?
Do I count them since they can be in production at any time?
The difference could be explained as follows.

[rbsec]

Dnscan looks to see if the domain has any NS records - because if it doesn't then it's not really usable on the public Internet. Of course, the fact that it has NS records doesn't necessarily mean that it has any A records, so you may get domains that don't resolve.

[Vincent-Millane]

I tested dnscan with different options with no better results.
I tested DNSrecon which gave me more results.
I documented myself on the Icann site which indicates that the sites are pre-reserved and will be allocated on a kind of fifo or auction between candidates.
If you have better information or utilities to share with me, I will be happy to hear from you.
My PM is on my profile.