I don't really think we need to have this discussion on debian-devel. Sorry for not setting reply-to. I will not post more than this one reply, which I hope sets things straight.
also sprach Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.10.09.2015 +0100]: > RFC 1034 section 3.6.2: > > Domain names in RRs which point at another name should always > point at the primary name and not the alias. This avoids extra > indirections in accessing information. I read that as: CNAMEs should not point at other CNAMEs, and MX/NS RRs should point at A records, not CNAMEs. Not that an email address' domain cannot be a CNAME (to an MX RR, which links to two A RRs). > See also RFC 1912 section 2.4: > > Don't use CNAMEs in combination with RRs which point to other names > like MX, CNAME, PTR and NS. (PTR is an exception if you want to > implement classless in-addr delegation.) For example, this is > strongly discouraged: > > podunk.xx. IN MX mailhost > mailhost IN CNAME mary > mary IN A 1.2.3.4 I don't do that. lapse.madduck.net is an alias for rw.madduck.net. rw.madduck.net mail is handled by 99 b.mx.madduck.net. rw.madduck.net mail is handled by 10 a.mx.madduck.net. What they say is that it should not be lapse.madduck.net is an alias for rw.madduck.net. lapse.madduck.net mail is handled by 99 b.mx.madduck.net. lapse.madduck.net mail is handled by 10 a.mx.madduck.net. ^^^^^ which makes perfect sense since it would be impossible to decide which MX to use if rw.madduck.net also had MX RRs. > [RFC 1034] in section 3.6.2 says this should not be done, and [RFC > 974] explicitly states that MX records shall not point to an alias > defined by a CNAME. I don't do either. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "africa is a nation..." - george w. bush
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
