multiple CNAMEs revisited

[Jim Reid]

>>>>> "CS" == CS  <google at fasttrackmonkey.com> writes:

    CS> This is a testy subject, and I'm fully aware that what I
    CS> want/need to do is not allowed.

Example of multiple CNAMEs and discussion about a spamassassin cluster
snipped. 

    CS> So given the current constraints, what is a good workaround?

The solution -- not a workaround -- is to use SRV records and get
your application to look them up in the DNS. This will do exactly what
you want without violating the protocol or deploying ugly kludges. It
will also be a whole lot easier to maintain and document.

    CS> If this is not feasible with bind, are there any other servers
    CS> I should be looking at?

Not really. If you continue to rely on an illegal DNS configuration,
that will come back to bite you when you least expect it. eg Some DNS
implementation that allows multiple CNAMEs goes away or removes that
feature in its next release. Like BIND9 did.... :-)