Suggestion for FAQ improvement

Nate Campi nate at campin.net
Sun Mar 24 06:39:05 UTC 2002


On Sat, Mar 23, 2002 at 10:32:54PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> Nate Campi wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 23, 2002 at 07:45:33PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> > > Michael Kjorling wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In the FAQ answer for the "CNAME and other data" problem
> > > > (http://dougbarton.net/bind-users/FAQ.html#CNAME-other), I believe
> > > > that it would not be inappropriate to mention that the DNSSEC record
> > > > types KEY, NXT and SIG are excluded from the "CNAME and other data"
> > > > rule.
> > >
> > >       I considered that, but IMO DNSSEC is a more advanced topic, and
> > > unecessarily confusing for new users.
> > 
> > For exceptions to this rule which only apply if using the DNSSEC
> > extensions, see http://blah/dnssec.html
> 
> 	Did you read the entry? I didn't say that there was no case where CNAME
> couldn't be combined with other RR's... I gave an example of how to fix
> the most common newbie error. However, if someone wants to come up with
> a URL, I'll look at including it.

What we're saying in not-so-many-words is that you might want to explain
it that way. People are good with simple rules like that. If you give
them in the FAQ the simple rule that they shouldn't combine CNAMEs and
other records, they'll be better off in the long run. Just give a
reference to the exception if you say that.

Sorry I wasn't clear (at all).
-- 
Nate

Real programmers don't comment their code. If it was hard to write,
it should be hard to understand.  -Anon.



More information about the bind-users mailing list