On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 04:01:48PM -0500, Noah Meyerhans wrote: > On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 02:10:07PM -0600, Adam Majer wrote: > > > > What does this mean? I am running bind but it is behind firewall and > > inaccesible from outside.. > > > > logcheck is being stupid. It sees the word "attack" in the message, and > warns you about it. > > The message from bind is simply stating that robotattack.com is in > violation of some RFC by having an NS record that points to a CNAME > (where it's supposed to point to an A record). It just means that their > netadmins are ignorant.
admin singular -- robotattack.com is my home machine. RFC 1033 defines a machine name as an absolute address (A) or a pointer (CNAME), and later states that an ns record contains a machine name, which would seem to make either an A or a CNAME valid. I'd appreciate it if you'd direct me to the newer material that supersedes the information in RFC 1033, Noah. I'll be searching myself as well. I don't wish to remain ignorant, of course. In the mean time, I've changed the configuration to use the machine's A name. Hopefully this will prevent Adam or others from seeing the warning again.
