[dlc at halibut.com: Re: Tracking all RRsets for a given host]
David Carmean
dlc-bu at halibut.com
Tue Jun 19 19:42:20 UTC 2001
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 03:35:03AM +0200, Brad Knowles wrote:
> Unfortunately, multiple PTR records just don't work the way most
> people expect them to. Virtually all applications I know of expect
> there to only be one canonical name for a host, and they only
> allocate one slot in their data structures to hold that information.
>
> Now, that said, since you're writing your own application, you
> could use a linked list (or a doubly-linked list, or a b-tree, or
> some other structure that would allow an indefinite number of
> entries) for the PTR records, and that would probably be okay. It's
> certainly not illegal from the DNS point of view, it's more an
> application problem.
It's only a tool to mange DNS, applying our rules for reserving
addresses, etc. All the traditional (broken?) apps remain in use.
> > And I guess multiple CNAME records are out of the
> > question....
>
> Multiple CNAME records for what?
As in:
somehost-le0 IN A 192.168.1.1
somehost-qfe0 IN A 192.168.2.2
somehost-qfe1 IN A 192.168.3.3
somehost IN CNAME somehost-le0
IN CNAME somehost-qfe0
IN CNAME somehost-qfe1
>
> If you want to get all this stuff into a single RRset, so that
> you can make sure you get atomic inserts and deletions (although you
> don't get locking or two-phase commit), I think you're going to have
> problems if you create unique host names for each interface of
> multi-homed hosts. You'll only get stuff tied together into a single
> RRset if it has exactly the same label, class, and record type.
>
It sounds like I won't be able to do that, strictly. Thanks.
More information about the bind-users
mailing list