Maradns forgets TXT records with asked for ANY ?

[Maxime Ritter]

Hello,

I tried to query a DNSBL by hand, using this command :

root /etc #  dig @127.0.0.1 any 80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to.

Which gives me this answer :

; <<>> DiG 9.5.1-P3 <<>> @127.0.0.1 any 80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to.
; (1 server found)
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 27185
;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to. IN      ANY

;; ANSWER SECTION:
80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to. 299 IN   A       127.0.0.0

;; Query time: 1657 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Tue May 18 22:12:00 2010
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 63

But in fact, what I really was expecting, was the TXT record. Which 
exists, I even see it when I do :

dig @127.0.0.1 TXT 80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to.

[...]
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to. IN      TXT

;; ANSWER SECTION:
80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to. 300 IN   TXT 
"http://www.quorum.to/q/fCseJEO8Z1oPbPA5wFR4ddKEtFBbedCmS_L34gAAAAA="
[...]

If I try another non-maradns server, it's perfectly working :

dig @213.186.33.99 any 80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to.

; <<>> DiG 9.5.1-P3 <<>> @213.186.33.99 any 80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to.
; (1 server found)
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 59606
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to. IN      ANY

;; ANSWER SECTION:
80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to. 0 IN     TXT 
"http://www.quorum.to/q/Is3bDrX8366shjfxIJp-vNKEtFBbedD6S_L4HQAAAAA="
80.180.132.210.list.quorum.to. 0 IN     A       127.0.0.0

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
list.quorum.to.         257550  IN      NS      listns1.quorum.to.

;; Query time: 166 msec
;; SERVER: 213.186.33.99#53(213.186.33.99)
;; WHEN: Tue May 18 22:25:57 2010
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 165

Is this a maradns bug ? I'm not a DNS expert, but it looks so for me.

Maxime.