In message <6.2.5.6.2.20090225140635.02c02...@resistor.net>, SM writes:
> At 13:46 25-02-2009, Mike Bernhardt wrote:
> >I've been looking into the RFCs regarding whether or not single-character
> >(alpha) host names are allowed or not. RFC 952 says no, but 2181 says that
> >host names must between 1 and 63 octets in length, which would appear to say
> >"yes."
>
> Section 2.1 of RFC 1123 discusses the syntax for host names and
> clarifies RFC 952. Host names can be up to 63 octets and the FQDNs
> up to 255 octets (RFC 2181). You can have a single-character host
> name as long as it follows the syntax.
RFC 1123 does not say that. It says:
Host software MUST handle host names of up to 63 characters and
SHOULD handle host names of up to 255 characters.
RFC 952 was written during the transition from a flat namespace to a
heirachical namespace. It handled both forms of names.
"m" as a hostname or alias is illegal.
"m.example.net" is not illegal as a hostname or alias.
RFC 1034 does not define what is or is not legal in a host names. It
deals with domain names which are not the same thing.
RFC 2181 does not define what is or is not legal in a host names. It
deals with domain names which are not the same thing.
> Regards,
> -sm
>
> _______________________________________________
> bind-users mailing list
> bind-users@lists.isc.org
> https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: mark_andr...@isc.org
_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
