On 06/19/2017 10:27 AM, Mark Elkins wrote:
Another solution could be to make one of the names a CNAME pointing to
the other name.


Just use one generic name for both services. rather than the two
"service" names.

Although in all honesty, I see nothing wrong with a lookup returning two
answers (in a single response packet)  for the one reverse query. BIND
certainly is not confused. I guess it confuses people?
I've written various scripts to do various DNS checks and have always
made (programmed for) this assumption - that there may be more than one
answer and there may also be CNAMEs involved. If other software is
confused - then perhaps it is badly written?

Some people do though, I believe, go overboard...
(dig  -x

Thank you, in  this case cname cannot be used, as IPV6 are different.
So, the point is does bind returns the 2 names in the same packet ?
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe 
from this list

bind-users mailing list

Reply via email to