Over in bind-users somone suggested a CIDR rDNS kludge in which you
delegate a bunch of names out of a rDNS zone to a second server,
and the second server answers them all from one zone, like this
$ORIGIN 1.1.1.in-addr.arpa.
@ SOA blah
10 NS otherserver
11 NS otherserver
12 NS otherserver
and o
On Thu, 27 Dec 2018 at 11:27, John Levine wrote:
> Over in bind-users somone suggested a CIDR rDNS kludge in which you
> delegate a bunch of names out of a rDNS zone to a second server,
> and the second server answers them all from one zone, like this
>
> $ORIGIN 1.1.1.in-addr.arpa.
> @ SOA blah
John Levine wrote:
Over in bind-users somone suggested a CIDR rDNS kludge in which you
delegate a bunch of names out of a rDNS zone to a second server,
and the second server answers them all from one zone, like this
$ORIGIN 1.1.1.in-addr.arpa.
@ SOA blah
10 NS otherserver
11 NS otherserver
1
$ORIGIN 1.1.1.in-addr.arpa.
@ SOA blah
10 NS otherserver
11 NS otherserver
12 NS otherserver
in RFC 2317 we do this with CNAME not NS. did the proponent explain why CNAME
wasn't suitable for her purposes?
He thinks $GENERATE confuses people.
Don't shoot, I'm just the messenger.
R's,
J
On 12/27/18 1:29 PM, John R Levine wrote:
He thinks $GENERATE confuses people.
No, $GENERATE is not why he, *I*, prefer to use NS over CNAME delegation.
I listed out multiple (2 ~ 3) manually as an example instead of using
$GENERATE purely to simplify the example. I've run across many people
On 12/27/18 12:59 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
in RFC 2317 we do this with CNAME not NS. did the proponent explain why
CNAME wasn't suitable for her purposes?
Vaguely.
I personally find CNAMEs to sub-domains to be sub optimal for various
reasons.
I have coached MANY (too many?) people through RFC
