using slave on un-published network??
Bob Vance
bobvance at alumni.caltech.edu
Wed Feb 7 04:00:27 UTC 2001
I assume that you're referring to using the CNAMEs:
@ IN A 1.2.3.8
www IN CNAME @
ftp IN CNAME @
as opposed to
@ IN A 1.2.3.8
www IN A 1.2.3.8
ftp IN A 1.2.3.8
I sorta like the first form, from a maintenance/elegance perspective;
only one field to change in order to change the address --
admittedly a small, strained advantage. I just prefer, in general, to
reduce "hard coding" to a minimum.
But the CNAME *does* cost an extra RR lookup to return the actual
canonical data. Also, if you ever moved, say, the ftp server to another
IP address, you'd end up having basically to rewrite the entire record
instead of possibly just the last byte of the existing record :)
I'm not sure what else is bad about it, but it seems that the gurus
here tend to prefer the second one.
But, let's let *them* speak ...
-------------------------------------------------
Tks | <mailto:BVance at sbm.com>
BV | <mailto:BobVance at alumni.caltech.edu>
Sr. Technical Consultant, SBM, A Gates/Arrow Co.
Vox 770-623-3430 11455 Lakefield Dr.
Fax 770-623-3429 Duluth, GA 30097-1511
=================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Bodley [mailto:Bodley at tflogic.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 2:06 PM
To: bobvance at alumni.caltech.edu
Subject: RE: using slave on un-published network??
Is there any reason to do it this way
@ IN A 1.2.3.8 ; address for name "abc.net."
www IN A 1.2.3.8 ; www also has that address and is the same host
Rather than this way.
; Written by Charles Bodley
;
; zone 'abc.com' last serial
@ IN SOA abc.com. hostmaster.tflogic.com. (
2001020101
43200
7200
1209600
3600 )
;
$include /var/named/NS
IN A 216.143.228.85
$include /var/named/MX
;
$ORIGIN abc.com.
localhost IN A 127.0.0.1
www IN CNAME abc.com.
ftp IN CNAME abc.com.
More information about the bind-users
mailing list