Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:08:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Weeks <jim@siteplus.net> To: J Bacher <jb@jbacher.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: DNS: having domain1.com and domain1.net point to the same IP. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009291003240.625-100000@veager.siteplus.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0009290852460.8156-100000@ns.shawneelink.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, J Bacher wrote: > > > 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. > > > The efficiency of the CNAME record is that is eliminates oversight when > re-IPing a network, subnetwork or group of servers. Agreed... I could also see this subject turning into a HOLY war. Similar to that of how small reverse blocks of IP's should be handled. Cheers, Jim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0009291003240.625-100000>