On Jan 15, 2009, at 6:33 AM, Halassy Zoltán wrote:
My configuration:
Have a router, two computers behind it. comp1 has webserver (no
mailserver), comp2 has mailserver (no webserver), have one IPv4
address, and few IPv6 addresses. The IPv4 address configured on the
router, DNAT-ing the TCPv4 ports to one of the computers (80 ->
comp1, 25 -> comp2, etc). IPv6 is natively routed.
I don't want to break forward <-> reverse mapping.
So the config would be something like this:
example.com. MX 10 mail.example.com.
www.example.com. A 1.2.3.4
mail.example.com. A 1.2.3.4
www.example.com. AAAA 2001::1234:1
mail.example.com. AAAA 2001::1234:2
1.0.0.0.4.3.2.1.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.1.0.0.2
.ip6.arpa. PTR www.example.com.
2.0.0.0.4.3.2.1.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.1.0.0.2
.ip6.arpa. PTR mail.example.com.
4.3.2.1.in-addr.arpa. PTR www.example.com.
4.3.2.1.in-addr.arpa. PTR mail.example.com.
Would this one break anything? Or anyone else have a better tip how
could i handle this situation? Multiple PTRs in this case is really
an issue?
Yes, it is an issue. Remove this record:
4.3.2.1.in-addr.arpa. PTR www.example.com.
Your web server doesn't need a PTR record.
The main thing i don't want to break forward <-> reverse symmetry
cause there are some sanity checks about this (like in spamfiltering).
Right, your mail server ought to have a PTR record. Your web server,
however, does not need it.
Chris Buxton
Professional Services
Men & Mice
_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
