Zone Record Order
Chris Buxton
cbuxton at menandmice.com
Fri Oct 6 18:45:14 UTC 2006
There's nothing wrong with putting the two records at the end - other
than having the SOA record first, the order of records in a zone is
usually unimportant. (If you disable RRSet reordering, then order of
records in an RRSet becomes important.)
Is there a reason not to simply specify a TTL in the two records?
Like this:
@ 900 MX 5 mail.cvlsoft.net.
mail 900 A 12.45.64.7
Chris Buxton
Men & Mice
Take control of your network
On Oct 6, 2006, at 11:21 AM, Josh Hyles wrote:
> Sent this out as the wrong subject line, sorry.
>
> On 10/6/06, Josh Hyles <josh.maillists at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Here is my record....
>>
>> $TTL 86400 ; 1 day
>> @ IN SOA ns1.goatinatree.com.
>> root.cvlsoft.net. (
>> 2006100605 ; serial number
>> 3600 ; refresh
>> 7200 ; retry
>> 604800 ; expire
>> 86400 ) ; default TTL
>>
>> ;
>> ; Zone NS records
>> ;
>>
>> @ NS ns1.goatinatree.com.
>> @ NS ns2.goatinatree.com.
>>
>> ;
>> ; Zone records
>> ;
>>
>> @ TXT "v=spf1 a mx ip4:12.45.64.8 ~all"
>> @ A 63.247.73.122
>> ftp A 63.247.73.122
>> www A 63.247.73.122
>> sqlsrv A 216.180.229.66
>> websrv A 216.180.229.67
>> $TTL 900 ; 15 minutes
>> @ MX 5 mail.cvlsoft.net.
>> mail A 12.45.64.7
>>
>> #####################################################
>>
>>
>> I am writing today because I'm trying to see if there is anything
>> wrong with putting the MX record at the bottom like I did in order to
>> only have 1 section for 15 minute TTL.
>>
>> Any help would be much appreciated
>>
>> Josh
>>
>
>
>
More information about the bind-users
mailing list