On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 04:44:05PM +0300, Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 03:36:45PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 09:21:55AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Saturday 17 April 2021 23:31:20 Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > > > It boiled down to something, someplace, not liking a hostname starting > > > with a number, I recalled I had to rename another machine a couple > > > months ago because it didn't work either. > > > > > > But I changed its hostname to dddprint, based on the previous 3dprint, > > > and it now works as requested. So my problem is solved. > > > > > > Is that just a head scratcher, or is there a valid reason to not allow a > > > hostname such as 6040 or 3dprint? Something starting with a numeral IOW. > > > > Well, it's in rfc1035 [1]: > > That RFC is obsolete. RFC1123 says on this:
Oh, thanks for that update. > [...] Host software MUST support this more liberal syntax. > > Host software MUST handle host names of up to 63 characters and SHOULD > handle host names of up to 255 characters. > > > Hence "3dprint" is a perfectly valid hostname, compliant with RFC1123. > As shown (to me) by a quick experiment, both dnsmasq and bind accept > "3dprint" for both A and AAAA record, and it resolves successfully. > > The original problem is more likely a local configuration problem, or an > operator error. Would be interesting to find out why... Cheers - t
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
