The RFC or the reason why you can not create CNAME record for t he "root record"

David Botham DBotham at OptimusSolutions.com
Thu Jun 3 13:54:38 UTC 2004


bind-users-bounce at isc.org wrote on 06/02/2004 02:16:23 PM:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 08:09:35 -0400 David Botham 
<DBotham at optimussolutions.com> wrote:
> 
> |> So how do we fix this?  I think a hack/patch is the only way.  But I 
see
> |> two different ways to approach that.  Which one is likely to work in 
> | most
> |> cases?
> | 
> | "This" is not broken and therefore cannot be fixed.  Change your mind 
> | instead.
> 
> Maybe we should just take CNAME out of the RFC altogether.  I frequently
> see many recommendations to NOT use it.  And the one place where it 
would
> be useful, it doesn't work (even though I am sure it can be fixed, and

Yes, I see a lot of "don't use" cname rr comments on the list.  I think 
that some of the reasoning behind those comments comes from the nature of 
the cname rr and some people's desire to use / misuse them as a silver 
bullet.  I think quite a bit of the time many of the list memebers say 
"use with caution" when it comes to cname rr's.

I do disagree with the "one place" aspect of your comments.  cname rr's 
are useful in RFC2317 and in the creation of generic zone database files; 
which may be able to help you in your problem.  I there have been a couple 
of threads on this subject on the list in the last few days.  Did I 
suggest using a generic zone db file to you?  If not, have you considered 
if they might be helpful?


> would even be compliant if the standard were updated to allow it).  As 
for
> changing my mind, that won't happen.  I have seen this done before and 
it
> worked then.  I will try what I can to make it work now.  Only if every

Yes, I believe older versions of BIND ignored the "cname and other data" 
rule and allowed admins to create cname rr's at the zone apex.  There was 
a big to-do on the list when BIND 9 was getting popular and many people 
were having problems migrating their zone database files that contained 
cname rr's at the apex.


> possible way to try it fails will I give up.
> 
> You're welcome to provide constructive suggestions, such which of a few
> ways to accomplish it might have a better chance of working.

Yes, sorry, my previous comment was a little flip and meant to be funny. 
Sorry about that... :)


hth,


Dave...

> 
> -- 
> 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> | Phil Howard KA9WGN       | http://linuxhomepage.com/ http://ham.org/ |
> | (first name) at ipal.net | http://phil.ipal.org/ 
http://ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
> 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 




More information about the bind-users mailing list