CNAME records having MX

[Michael Kjorling]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Canonical name != 'A' record.

"com.", for example, is a canonical name - but (thankfully) doesn't
have any A record. However, it is _perfectly_ legal to CNAME something
to "com.".

Whether that'd be terribly useful, is a completely different story.
But a canonical name does not necessarily have to own an A record; it
simply is not another alias (CNAME, perhaps DNAME?, etc.)

What's the case with DNAMEs, by the way? Are they aliases, or not?


Michael Kjörling


On Dec 18 2001 14:37 -0000, Hamish Marson wrote:

> > A CNAME can point to an MX, that is fine.
>
> Not.
>
> A CNAME points to a canonical name. Which is an A record. (Canonical by the
> dictionary meaning the real name). Thus a CNAME is an alias for an A record.
>
> I believe you can have a CNAME and an MX record with the name name though.
>
> An MX record should point to an A record.

- -- 
Michael Kjörling  --  Programmer/Network administrator  ^..^
Internet: michael at kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4   \/
PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e

"There is something to be said about not trying to be glamorous
and popular and cool. Just be real -- and life will be real."
(Joyce Sequichie Hifler, September 13 2001, www.hifler.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html

iD8DBQE8H2XgKqN7/Ypw4z4RAl97AKDIyXlAYF5OHHaMifO/o7GgHma2cACg3S9y
/PFQjN0DJOlpHxyewF6gBRA=
=OCA1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----