[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]


can someone explain to me, why BIND 9 complains when you list CNAMEs
as MX records for hosts? i seem to recall that one should not, but:

   The first step for the mailer at LOCAL is to issue a query for MX
   RRs for REMOTE. [snip]

   Certain responses to the query are considered errors:

      Getting no response to the query. [snip]

      Getting a response in which the truncation field of the header
      is set. [snip]

      Getting a response in which the response code is non-zero.

   Mailers are expected to do something reasonable in the face of an
   error. [snip]

   There is one other special case.  If the response contains an
   answer which is a CNAME RR, it indicates that REMOTE is actually an
   alias for some other domain name. The query should be repeated with
   the canonical domain name.

   If the response does not contain an error response, and does not
   contain aliases, its answer section should be a (possibly zero
   length) list of MX RRs for domain name REMOTE (or REMOTE's true
   domain name if REMOTE was a alias). [snip]

according to the RFC, this is not a problem and should be handled
just perfectly...

this is just interest...

martin;              (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
  \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; net@madduck
as i learn the innermost secrets of the people around me,
they reward me in many ways to keep me quiet.

Attachment: pgpdVhghIPt63.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: