On 11.09.14 13:14, Bob Harold wrote:
In reference to the question of using a CNAME or A record for
www.example.com, it seems to me that the best solution, if we could ever
get there, would be to create a new record type that means redirect an A
or lookup to this other name. Like this:
On Wed, 2014-09-10 at 18:13 -0400, Kevin Darcy wrote:
No, what I'm saying is that if
example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, and
www.example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, then
where does 48.113.0.203.in-addr.arpa point?
Some people will point it at example.com, some will point
On 10.09.14 18:13, Kevin Darcy wrote:
No, what I'm saying is that if
example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, and
www.example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, then
where does 48.113.0.203.in-addr.arpa point?
Completely your decision.
Some people will point it at example.com, some will
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
If you point www CNAME @, the 'www' will have both MX and NS records same as
example.com. Which may e.g. cause rejectd on backup MX hosts, apparently
not designed to receive mail for www.example.com.
Actually no. All other RRs are supposed
In article mailman.892.1410364699.26362.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
Alan Clegg a...@clegg.com wrote:
On 9/10/14, 8:42 AM, Sam Wilson wrote:
And you could reduce maintenance very slightly by replacing
www in A 75.100.245.133
with
www in
In article mailman.902.1410422525.26362.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
Antonio Querubin t...@lavanauts.org wrote:
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
If you point www CNAME @, the 'www' will have both MX and NS records same as
example.com. Which may e.g. cause rejectd on backup
On 9/11/2014 3:47 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 10.09.14 18:13, Kevin Darcy wrote:
No, what I'm saying is that if
example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, and
www.example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, then
where does 48.113.0.203.in-addr.arpa point?
Completely your decision.
Mark,
Depending on implementation, a PTR RRset with multiple
records either
-- only ever gets answered with the first record of the set (in which
case the second and subsequent records of the set are just a waste of
space), or
-- answers in a random, cyclic and/or round-robin
On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 11:27 -0400, Kevin Darcy wrote:
Mark,
Depending on implementation, a PTR RRset with multiple
records either
-- only ever gets answered with the first record of the set (in
which case the second and subsequent records of the set are just a
waste of space),
On 9/11/2014 3:47 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 10.09.14 18:13, Kevin Darcy wrote:
No, what I'm saying is that if
example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, and
www.example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, then
where does 48.113.0.203.in-addr.arpa point?
Completely your decision.
On 9/11/2014 12:08 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 9/11/2014 3:47 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 10.09.14 18:13, Kevin Darcy wrote:
No, what I'm saying is that if
example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, and
www.example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, then
where does
On 9/11/2014 12:08 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
we both also said it's personal preference.
On 11.09.14 12:53, Kevin Darcy wrote:
And I'm saying that's a cop-out. It should be a recommended practice
encouraging consistent
forward/reverse mappings is something that all DNS admins have
In reference to the question of using a CNAME or A record for
www.example.com, it seems to me that the best solution, if we could ever
get there, would be to create a new record type that means redirect an A
or lookup to this other name. Like this:
example.com. IN SOA
example.com.
On 9/11/2014 11:51 AM, Mark Elkins wrote:
On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 11:27 -0400, Kevin Darcy wrote:
Mark,
Depending on implementation, a PTR RRset with multiple
records either
-- only ever gets answered with the first record of the set (in
which case the second and subsequent records
On 9/11/2014 11:51 AM, Mark Elkins wrote:
On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 11:27 -0400, Kevin Darcy wrote:
Mark,
Depending on implementation, a PTR RRset with multiple
records either
-- only ever gets answered with the first record of the set (in
which case the second and subsequent
In message 5411bdd6.4010...@chrysler.com, Kevin Darcy writes:
(Yes, I'm aware that there was a proposal recently discussed on the
DNSOP list for an MX-target convention to denote no mail service
offered here. That would presumably solve the problem I cited in the
previous paragraph. But
Hi,
xxx.com and IP address 192.168.1.100 is just a example domain name and IP
address. Our boss want everybody access our domain example.com through
browser, then it will redirect to our web site www.example.com. So I want
to get more information about unexpected impact when we changed DNS
In article mailman.890.1410357943.26362.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
sch...@adi.com (Thomas Schulz) wrote:
Hi,
xxx.com and IP address 192.168.1.100 is just a example domain name and IP
address. Our boss want everybody access our domain example.com through
browser, then it will redirect
On 9/10/14, 8:42 AM, Sam Wilson wrote:
And you could reduce maintenance very slightly by replacing
www in A 75.100.245.133
with
www in CNAME @
And now you have an MX record, 3 NS records and a bunch of other crap
associated with the WWW
On 9/10/14, 8:42 AM, Sam Wilson wrote:
And you could reduce maintenance very slightly by replacing
www in A 75.100.245.133
with
www in CNAME @
On 10.09.14 08:58, Alan Clegg wrote:
And now you have an MX record, 3 NS records and a bunch of other
On 9/10/2014 11:58 AM, Alan Clegg wrote:
On 9/10/14, 8:42 AM, Sam Wilson wrote:
And you could reduce maintenance very slightly by replacing
www in A 75.100.245.133
with
www in CNAME @
And now you have an MX record, 3 NS records and a bunch of other
On 9/10/14, 2:13 PM, Kevin Darcy wrote:
On 9/10/2014 11:58 AM, Alan Clegg wrote:
On 9/10/14, 8:42 AM, Sam Wilson wrote:
And you could reduce maintenance very slightly by replacing
www in A 75.100.245.133
with
www in CNAME @
And now you have an
On 9/10/2014 5:20 PM, Alan Clegg wrote:
On 9/10/14, 2:13 PM, Kevin Darcy wrote:
On 9/10/2014 11:58 AM, Alan Clegg wrote:
On 9/10/14, 8:42 AM, Sam Wilson wrote:
And you could reduce maintenance very slightly by replacing
www in A 75.100.245.133
with
www
Hey Kevin,
This is not an issue at all.
A PTR is different then a A record and can be used by two reverse
domain names and only the owner of the IP addresses space can define them.
I am not sure if two PTR records for two domains will be applied to one
IP but it is possible for two IP
No, what I'm saying is that if
example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, and
www.example.com owns an A record 203.0.113.48, then
where does 48.113.0.203.in-addr.arpa point?
Some people will point it at example.com, some will point it at
www.example.com. What you get is a mish-mosh. No
Well this is a confusing point but it's rather an administrative
decision to make.
If indeed the network\server\domain administrator is not aware of his
services he will either have or will not have decision to make.
It will depend on whether he knows what he is doing.
Mish-mosh or banana he
Hi Kevin,
Thanks for your help. Do not worry. The IP address 192.168.1.100 is just
for example.
Best Regards,
Pete Fong
2014-09-09 3:30 GMT+08:00 Kevin Darcy k...@chrysler.com:
Based on the zone contents below, you shouldn't have any problem
changing the 192.168.1.100 address to anything
Hi,
xxx.com and IP address 192.168.1.100 is just a example domain name and IP
address. Our boss want everybody access our domain example.com through
browser, then it will redirect to our web site www.example.com. So I want
to get more information about unexpected impact when we changed DNS
Hi Everybody,
The below item is our DNS (BIND) server configuration. our Domain* xxx.com
http://xxx.com *is assigned IP address 192.168.1.100 which is our one of
DNS server. Can we change it to our web server IP address ? Because we want
anybody access our domain *xxx.com http://xxx.com* with
On 08.09.14 15:43, Pete Fong wrote:
Subject: A record of domain name must be name server ?
no.
The below item is our DNS (BIND) server configuration. our Domain* xxx.com
http://xxx.com *is assigned IP address 192.168.1.100 which is our one of
DNS server. Can we change it to our web server IP
- fantomas uh...@fantomas.sk:
On 08.09.14 15:43, Pete Fong wrote:
Subject: A record of domain name must be name server ?
no.
The below item is our DNS (BIND) server configuration. our Domain*
xxx.com
http://xxx.com *is assigned IP address 192.168.1.100 which is our one
of
DNS server
In article mailman.871.1410167955.26362.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
Pete Fong petefong2...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Matus UHLAR - fantomas,
Sorry, I do not understand the meaning of It could only issue a problem if
you pointed example.com. NS example.com.
or similar MX etc records. Do you mind
On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 03:43:22PM +0800, Pete Fong wrote:
The below item is our DNS (BIND) server configuration. our Domain*
xxx.com
I think that is a porn site. If you mean to use that name as an
example, please use example.com instead. Putting HTTP links to
pornography in your emails is
Based on the zone contents below, you shouldn't have any problem
changing the 192.168.1.100 address to anything you want.
But, of course, the zone is illegal because it only has 1 NS record
published at the apex (there is a strict minimum of at least 2), and, as
it stands now, if it is an
34 matches
Mail list logo
