On 12/08/10 16:34, Yohann Lepage wrote:
2010/8/12 Phil Mayers<p.may...@imperial.ac.uk>:
Is this still the case (that NS->CNAME is invalid)?
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2181.txt
10.3. MX and NS records
The domain name used as the value of a NS resource record, or part of
the value of a MX resource record must not be an alias. Not only is
the specification clear on this point, but using an alias in either
of these positions neither works as well as might be hoped, nor well
fulfills the ambition that may have led to this approach. This
domain name must have as its value one or more address records.
Currently those will be A records, however in the future other record
types giving addressing information may be acceptable. It can also
have other RRs, *but never a CNAME RR*.
--
Yohann
www.2xyo.info
Thanks, but perhaps I should be more specific about what I'm asking:
Is it still the case that *Bind* will not follow a delegation where an
NS record points at a CNAME?
In any event, as has been pointed out to me, the zone is broken - I have
contacted the hostmaster - but I was curious that Bind did not appear to
be following the delegation *and* did not appear to be logging an error
(which may be my logging configuration).
_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
