Cnames and "virtual name based hosting"

[fih]

I'm glad to hear that somebody else is sharing my original thoughts.

The stub resolver i think always does one lookup but the resolving DNS have
to do twice and i guess that's what people have thoughts about.

fih

"Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer at nic.fr> skrev i meddelandet
news:c50l19$4lk$1 at sf1.isc.org...
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 10:08:14AM +0000,
>  fih <frhak at hotmail.com> wrote
>  a message of 45 lines which said:
>
> > it's bad to use Cnames because resolvers needs to do two lookups
>
> Sometimes, the nameserver does it so the resolver needs only one
> lookup.
>
> Since it is a BIND mailing list, you can notice that BIND 8 and BIND 9
> both perform this additional processing).
>
> ~ % dig +short @ns1.nic.fr A www.afnic.fr
> rigolo.nic.fr.
> 192.134.4.20
> ~ % dig +short @ns2.nic.fr A www.afnic.fr
> rigolo.nic.fr.
> ~ % dig +short @ns3.nic.fr A www.afnic.fr
> rigolo.nic.fr.
> 192.134.4.20
>
> (ns1 = BIND 8, ns2 = nsd, ns3 = BIND 9)
>
> > and also using Cnames and "virtual name based hosting" togeather
> > would be illegal???
>
> This is plainly wrong.
>
>