Can DNAME records be deployed in the wild?

[Niall O'Reilly]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 2 May 2007, at 16:46, Chris Thompson wrote:

>  2. Are there stub resolvers around that cannot cope with the
>     answers that BIND 9 gives, in which the DNAME record precedes
>     the synthesised CNAME record?

	AFAIK, (some versions of) glibc cope, but whinge.

	My domestic router is a hulk PC running good ol' Fedora Core 3.
	It makes log noise whenever I reach it from my domestic /48. Thus:

May  3 14:51:55 bark sshd[24739]: gethostby*.getanswer: asked for  
"8.7.b.8.c.2.e.f.f.f.4.2.1.1.2.0.1.0.0.0.f. 
3.1.0.0.7.7.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.arpa IN PTR", got type "39"

	It then seems to pick up the CNAME and use that.

	I don't know about MS stubs.


	Best regards,

	Niall O'Reilly
	University College Dublin IT Services

	PGP key ID: AE995ED9 (see www.pgp.net)
	Fingerprint: 23DC C6DE 8874 2432 2BE0 3905 7987 E48D AE99 5ED9



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFGOevReYfkja6ZXtkRAsj9AJ0SR0Ql6FoicnlW+sIyU6KEHwdm3ACfcxAz
mT62ggZW/zRMCXgCZ8ZVJdw=
=TRuL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----