Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 13:23:11 +0400 From: "Artem Koutchine" <matrix@ipform.ru> To: "Jim Weeks" <jim@siteplus.net> Cc: "Andy Wolf" <Andy.Wolf@nextra.de>, "James Wyatt" <jwyatt@rwsystems.net>, "Jan Knepper" <jan@digitaldaemon.com>, <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>, <freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: DNS: having domain1.com and domain1.net point to the same IP. Message-ID: <00dc01c02ac4$81bedde0$0c00a8c0@ipform.ru> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009290850070.335-100000@veager.siteplus.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: "Jim Weeks" <jim@siteplus.net>> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Artem Koutchine wrote: > > > From: "Jim Weeks" <jim@siteplus.net> > > > > > > On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Andy Wolf wrote: > > > > > > > We use two A records now and therefor accept redundancy. The reverse > > lookup > > > > of course can only point to one of the labels. > > > > > > The general consensus throughout the industry seems to be that C names are > > > evil. > > > > > > I have never been bitten by just using A names. > > > > > > > I have. Revers lookup might fail and some secure smtp server and other > > daemons > > do not allow access if reverse lookup failes. For example: > > What type of smtp setup would fail because the reverse lookup name did not > match that of the virtual domain? > > Do you have an example of a daemon that would choke? > That actually depends on the setup and can be achived in almost any network active daemon. I have had problems with SENDMAIL!!! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00dc01c02ac4$81bedde0$0c00a8c0>