Re: reverse lookup to CNAME

In article gld0if$3c...@sf1.isc.org, John Bond john.r.b...@gmail.com wrote: My idea was to create records like the following zone for .local bob-www-sol-l01 IN A 1.1.1.1 metisIN CNAME bob-www-sol-l01 zone for 1.1.1 1

BIND 9.6 Flaw - CNAME vs. A Record in MX Records are NOT Illegal

BIND 9.6 'named' throws the following message during startup claiming that it is illegal to use a CNAME/alias in the MX record. I beg to differ. There is no such standard nor requirement prohibiting the use of CNAME/alias in an MX record. Message thrown at startup: named[3307]: zone

RE: BIND 9.6 Flaw - CNAME vs. A Record in MX Records are NOT Illegal

Al: If you read RFC 2181 section 10.3, RFC 1034 section 3.6, RFC 1912 (page 6), the average person would understand that it's strongly discouraged. Perhaps illegal is too strong a word, but the weight of the RFCs and best practices appears to disagree with your assessment that there is no

Re: BIND 9.6 Flaw - CNAME vs. A Record in MX Records are NOT Illegal

Al Stu wrote: BIND 9.6 ‘named’ throws the following message during startup claiming that it is illegal to use a CNAME/alias in the MX record. I beg to differ. There is no such standard nor requirement prohibiting the use of CNAME/alias in an MX record. Some people seem to think RFC 974 creates a