Does "@" in CNAME record not work?
Joseph S D Yao
jsdy at cospo.osis.gov
Fri Jul 13 17:46:05 UTC 2001
On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 02:32:58AM +0000, Jim Lum wrote:
...
> Then, as I read the book, I ran across the section that I cited above,
> which I took (and which I guess I still take) to imply that, in a
> "correct" DBxxx.. file, you should TRY to avoid having names with the
> same IP address. I've read those two paragraphs (bottom of pg. 64, top
> of pg. 65) over several times, and I THINK that's what it's trying to
> say?
...
Cricket has said what he meant. That paragraph refers specifically to
finding THE canonical name, from a "use" name. CNAMEs allow this, so
if for ANY reason you want a human - or a savvy program - to know the
actual machine name without doing a reverse DNS lookup, then IF YOU CAN
you should use a CNAME record. That's Cricket's recommendation, and as
always a good one. But don't extend its application universally.
Name servers and mail servers should always have A records instead of
CNAME records. This overrides that recommendation. But whenever you
have multiple A records for the same IP address, cross-reference them
in comments or in some other immediately-obvious way.
Any name that has other records IS a canonical name - you must use an A
record, and cannot use a CNAME record [to try to pretend that some
other name is the canonical name].
You should not try to chain CNAMEs too far. In fact, many believe that
any chaining is too far.
Hope this helps.
--
Joe Yao jsdy at cospo.osis.gov - Joseph S. D. Yao
OSIS Center Computer Support EMT-B
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is not an official statement of COSPO policies.
More information about the bind-users
mailing list