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

[Matthew Pounsett]

On 25-Jan-2009, at 23:06 , Barry Margolin wrote:

> In article <gli8nu$ja7$1 at sf1.isc.org>,
> Matthew Pounsett <matt at conundrum.com> wrote:
>
>> In the example above, when I query for "IN A mx.xyz.com?" I do not  
>> get
>> an address record back (A, AAAA)..instead I get a CNAME record.
>> Requirements NOT met.
>
> Then there's something wrong with your resolver, since they're  
> supposed
> to follow CNAME records automatically, and return the requested record
> type from the canonical name.

You're right, of course.  I was over simplifying my point, which was  
that the answer to the question asked is not an address record.  I  
should probably know better than to do that. :)


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20090125/c3a0c0b8/attachment.bin>