Re: CNAME as virtual Email host

• To: djb-qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Subject: Re: CNAME as virtual Email host
• From: Richard Letts <r.j.letts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 15:37:55 +0100
• Delivered-to: mailing list djb-qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Delivered-to: djb-qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Mailing-List: contact djb-qmail-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
• Newsgroups: salford.mailing-lists.qmail
• Organization: Network Services
• References: <5pbtri$1b0$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Reply-to: r.j.letts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Sender: news@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Peter da Silva wrote:
> 
> OK, I got my ponytail pulled too tight. Question is, why is this requirement
> in the RFCs? What am I missing?

given the following:
www.foo.blah	IN	CNAME	ganymede.foo.blah.
		IN	MX	5	post.foo.blah.

ganymede.foo.blah	IN	A	146.87.3.6
		IN	MX	5	ganymede.foo.blah.

where should mail for user@xxxxxxxxxxxx be delivered to?
The MX record for www.foo.blah, or the MX record for
the thing pointed to by the CNAME? either choice might
be correct, but there is no easy way to disambiguate (word?)
them. the DNS RFC's explicitly forbids this, and BIND refuses
to load the domain.

the following is succinct and unambigous, and probably does
what was originally intended:

www.foo.blah	IN	A	146.87.3.6
		IN	MX	5	post.foo.blah.

ganymede.foo.blah	IN	A	146.87.3.6
		IN	MX	5	ganymede.foo.blah.

RjL

• From:

• Prev: Restrict incoming mail
• Next: Re: Qmail equivalent of sendmail's FALLBACK_MX and name of dial-up
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread