Ignoring unqualified MX's ?
barmar at bbnplanet.com
Sat Mar 25 20:24:51 UTC 2000
In article <38DC8134.9890DE2A at anta.net>, Thor Kottelin <thor at anta.net> wrote:
>BIND Users Mailing List wrote:
>> From: "Cricket Liu" <cricket at acmebw.com>
>> Unless the folks who maintain the root zone add a domain name to
>> the zone called "localhost.," then, as Barry says, there's no such
>> domain name as "localhost."
>Now you have me confused as well. :-)
>RFC 2606 (status: BCP) states:
> The ".localhost" TLD has traditionally been statically defined in
> host DNS implementations as having an A record pointing to the
> loop back IP address and is reserved for such use. Any other use
> would conflict with widely deployed code which assumes this use.
>Do you disagree with the above, or am I just misunderstanding your point?
There's no conflict. The RFC says that .localhost is *not* going to be
created as a *real* TLD. It's reserved because many people define it
locally. All the reserved TLDs in the RFC can be used locally.
But, as the original poster discovered, defining .localhost on your server
can create new problems, so I don't recommend people do it.
Barry Margolin, barmar at bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Powered by BBN, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.
More information about the bind-users