Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10102081346001.16513-100000@innerfire.net>
By author: Gerhard Mack <gmack@innerfire.net>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Thanklfully bind 9 barfs if you even try this sort of thing.
>
Personally I find it puzzling what's wrong with MX -> CNAME at all; it
seems like a useful setup without the pitfalls that either NS -> CNAME
or CNAME -> CNAME can cause (NS -> CNAME can trivially result in
irreducible situations; CNAME -> CNAME would require a link maximum
count which could result in obscure breakage.)
-hpa
-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 15 2001 - 21:00:12 EST