Sigh: your mail server is blacklisting email from mac.com. Begin forwarded message: > From: postmas...@mac.com > Date: September 14, 2011 2:53:05 PM PDT > To: cswi...@mac.com > Subject: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed > > This report relates to a message you sent with the following header fields: > > Message-id: <2be47d87-8417-4055-8466-f47cd7fdb...@mac.com> > Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:52:34 -0700 > From: Chuck Swiger <cswi...@mac.com> > To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <r...@tristatelogic.com> > Subject: Re: Proper CNAME interpretation > > Your message cannot be delivered to the following recipients: > > Recipient address: r...@tristatelogic.com > Reason: Remote SMTP server has rejected address > Diagnostic code: smtp;550 5.7.1 <asmtpout025.mac.com>: Helo command > rejected: Domain mac.com BLACKLISTED - Use > http://www.tristatelogic.com/contact.html > Remote system: dns;server1.tristatelogic.com > (TCP|17.148.16.100|49837|69.62.255.118|25) (segfault.tristatelogic.com ESMTP > Postfix [2.5.3]) > > Reporting-MTA: dns;asmtp025-bge351000.mac.com (tcp-daemon) > Arrival-date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:52:35 -0700 (PDT) > > Original-recipient: rfc822;r...@tristatelogic.com > Final-recipient: rfc822;r...@tristatelogic.com > Action: failed > Status: 5.7.1 (Remote SMTP server has rejected address) > Remote-MTA: dns;server1.tristatelogic.com > (TCP|17.148.16.100|49837|69.62.255.118|25) > (segfault.tristatelogic.com ESMTP Postfix [2.5.3]) > Diagnostic-code: smtp;550 5.7.1 <asmtpout025.mac.com>: Helo command rejected: > Domain mac.com BLACKLISTED - Use http://www.tristatelogic.com/contact.html > > From: Chuck Swiger <cswi...@mac.com> > Date: September 14, 2011 2:52:34 PM PDT > To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <r...@tristatelogic.com> > Cc: bind-users@lists.isc.org > Subject: Re: Proper CNAME interpretation > > > On Sep 14, 2011, at 2:27 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: >> The second part however seems to go more to my question, which is "What is >> the resolver supposed to do when some knucklehead breaks the rules and puts >> a CNAME in with some other stuff?" > > Depends on which query one issued. The very next paragraph of RFC-1034 is: > > "CNAME RRs cause special action in DNS software. When a name server > fails to find a desired RR in the resource set associated with the > domain name, it checks to see if the resource set consists of a CNAME > record with a matching class. If so, the name server includes the CNAME > record in the response and restarts the query at the domain name > specified in the data field of the CNAME record. The one exception to > this rule is that queries which match the CNAME type are not restarted." > > In other words, if you ask for an A record, and you get back both a CNAME and > an A record, then the A record matches and that's what > gethostbyname()/getaddrinfo() or whatever should receive from the resolver. > If you asked for an AAAA record, and got that same reply of a CNAME and an A > record, then the resolver should chase the CNAME's data field. > >> It sure _sounds_ like that second sentence is encouraging any & all people >> who are writing resolvers, or other related tools, that they should ignore >> any flotsam & jetsum that appear along side a CNAME. But is that encourage- >> ment espressed anywhere as a "MUST"? > > By no means. You only ought to chase a CNAME if you got a CNAME *instead* of > the resource type that you asked for. > > Regards, > -- > -Chuck > > >
_______________________________________________ Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe from this list bind-users mailing list bind-users@lists.isc.org https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
