BIND 9.6 Flaw - CNAME vs. A Record in MX Records are NOT "Illegal"

[Al Stu]

BIND 9.6 'named' throws the following message during startup claiming that it is illegal to use a CNAME/alias in the MX record.  I beg to differ.  There is no such standard nor requirement prohibiting the use of CNAME/alias in an MX record.



Message thrown at startup:

"named[3307]: zone MyDomain.com/IN: MyDomain.com/MX 'MX1.MyDomain.com' is a CNAME (illegal)"



Additionally in Chapter 6 - BIND Configuration Reference, Zone File, Discussion of MX Records states the MX records "must have an associated address record (A or AAAA) - CNAME is not sufficient."



Some people seem to think RFC 974 creates a standard which prohibits the use of CNAME/alias in MX records.  But very much to the contrary RFC 974 demonstrates that CNAME/alias is permitted in MX records.



ISC's message that a CNAME/alias in an MX record is illegal is incorrect and just an attempt by ISC to get people to go along with what is only a perceived rather than actual standard/requirement, and should be removed so as not to further the fallacy of this perceived perception of a standard/requirement, as it is neither a standard nor a requirement, and certainly not illegal.



Al Stu

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20090124/7a99ce6f/attachment.html>