Richard Letts wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jun 1999, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
>
> > Jun 26 01:10:23 ns1 tcp-env[4348]: warning: can't verify hostname:
>gethostbyname(cobalt) failed
> > Jun 26 01:10:23 ns1 tcp-env[4348]: refused connect from 216.221.160.30
> >
> > dig -x output...
> > ;; ANSWER SECTION:
> > 30.160.221.216.in-addr.arpa. 11h22m24s IN PTR cobalt.
> > 30.160.221.216.in-addr.arpa. 11h22m24s IN PTR cobalt.propagation.net.
> >
> > Since I don't know... I'm asking... is that reverse pointer for that
> > host wrong? It can't be just cobalt. and/or there can't be two?
>
> yes. it might be (on a private network using IP, but this isn't).
> there can only be one.
There CAN be more than one. I've used as many as 7 PTR's on one IP before.
Maybe there's not _supposed_ _to_ be, but it _can_ be. Maybe qmail won't
support more than one, but it can get more than one. I did get all 7 PTRs
and the above example shows that the 2 records do come through. So why
would BIND support it if it's not supposed to be?
--
Phil Howard | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phil | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
at | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ipal | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dot | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
net | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
