So 10.14.22.11 is a legal hostname, right?
We had a recent experience where our DNS administration
system allowed someone to insert in a CNAME record that
resembled this:
www.example.com. CNAME 10.14.22.11.
A fascinating thing about this is that my computer/browser could
take me to www.example.com just fine.
John Wobus
Cornell
On Jan 30, 2011, at 7:30 AM, p...@mail.nsbeta.info wrote:
From RFC 1123
One aspect of host name syntax is hereby changed: the
restriction on the first character is relaxed to allow either a
letter or a digit. Host software MUST support this more
liberal
syntax.
p...@mail.nsbeta.info writes:
Joseph S D Yao writes:
The labels must follow the rules for ARPANET host names. They must
start with a letter, end with a letter or digit, and have as
interior
characters only letters, digits, and hyphen. There are also some
restrictions on the length. Labels must be 63 characters or less.
A label must start with a letter? oh I don't think so.
How about these domains which all have huge DNS traffic?
163.com
126.com
51.com
56.com
yes 163.com is a domain name but "163" also can be treated as a
label for
domain "com.", is it?
Thanks.
Regards.
_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
