Re: Load balancing/Multiple CNAME's (Was: Re: Beyond DNS...)

[Studded <Studded () san rr com>]

Michael Shields wrote:
> In article <35788244.55A2D71 () san rr com>,
> Studded <Studded () san rr com> wrote:
> > > For the same reason you can't CNAME a zone's root to something else
> > > (meaning, if I am setting up the zone map for n.ml.org, I can CNAME
> > > web.n.ml.org to narnia.n.ml.org,
> >
> >       Right.
> >
> > > but I can't CNAME n.ml.org to
> > > narnia.n.ml.org, nor can I CNAME n.ml.org to ftp.microsoft.com, or any
> > > other host),
> >
> >       Why not?
>
> Because you cannot have CNAME RRs along with any other RR, including
> NS and SOA.  DNSSEC RRs are excepted.

        True, the example was a little fuzzy. If n.ml.org is the origin of that
zone then no, you can't add a CNAME for it. My point was that if it's
valid to point a name at a CNAME there is nothing wrong with pointing it
to one outside the zone, which is a common misconception. Sorry for the
confusion. 
 
> >       Finally, if you plan to disagree with anything in this post, please
> > quote chapter and verse from the relevant RFC. I've spent a lot of time
> > studying this topic and am quite sure of my facts.
>
> RFC 2181 section 10.1.

        Sorry I wasn't clear. I meant that you should actually quote the
material you want to refer to. I can't find any RFC 2181 either at
ftp://rs.internic.net/rfc/ or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/. If you would be so
kind as to quote exactly what you are referring to and provide a URL so
that I can check out the context I'd appreciate it.

Thanks,

Doug
-- 
***         Chief Operations Officer, DALnet IRC network        ***
***   Proud designer and maintainer of one of the world's largest
*** Internet Relay Chat servers with 5,328 simultaneous connections
***   Try spider.dal.net on ports 6662-4    (Powered by FreeBSD)