cname quick question

Danny Mayer mayer at
Wed Mar 7 03:46:41 UTC 2001

At 06:21 PM 3/6/01, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>Jim Reid <jim at> writes:
> >Like Tal Dayan, you are being obtuse or deliberately provocative.
> >Please *read* the extract from RFC1034 above. Now *think* about what
> >it says and what that means. Pay particular attention to the last
> >sentence. Hint: suppose was a CNAME pointing at
> > That CNAME is cached by some name server. It can
> >safely use that cached CNAME without having to query the
> >name servers to check that no other record types exist for
> >
>It would seem that the problem is political and not technical.

         No, the problem IS technical.  A large number of problems are now showing
up where people are getting transfer errors when trying to update the slave servers.


More information about the bind-users mailing list