Proper CNAME interpretation
Ronald F. Guilmette
rfg at tristatelogic.com
Thu Sep 15 00:21:29 UTC 2011
In message <4E7131A6.3000102 at chrysler.com>,
Kevin Darcy <kcd at chrysler.com> wrote:
>Indeed. It should be noted that not only does the graphiteops.com name
>break the "CNAME and other" rule, but it's a *self-referential* CNAME
>(rdata = graphiteops.com), so if one tried to chase it, one could chase
>infinitely. This is, presumably, what RFC 1034 calls a "CNAME loop"...
Yes, it is MAJORLY snafued alright. That's what makes it such a good
test case, e.g. for software that does resolution-like thingies.
More information about the bind-users
mailing list