On Thu, 2006-05-25 at 14:46 +0200, Markus Neubauer wrote: > a request: > dig @ns1.std-service.com ns1.std-service.com cname > is answered with:
> ;; QUESTION SECTION: > ;ns1.std-service.com. IN CNAME > > ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: > ns1.std-service.com. 604800 IN NS ns1.std-service.com. > > ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: > ns1.std-service.com. 604800 IN A 212.227.51.17 This is perfectly valid. You defined a referrer as in "look for ns1 on ns1.std-service.com". MyDNS returns the referral and the IP address to query next, as it is authoritative for this zone. Otherwise the client issuing the client would have to possibility to know its IP. > But there is no cname record in the files: instead there is a configuration: > ns1 604800 IN NS 0 ns1.std-service.com. > in the sql base. There is no CNAME record returned. What makes you think like that? There's a semi-colon commenting that one out. > When this record is deactivted the respose is (correct): > ;; QUESTION SECTION: > ;ns1.std-service.com. IN CNAME > > ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: > std-service.com. 604800 IN SOA ns2.std-service.de. > hostmaster.std-service.com. 2006052501 10000 1800 604800 3600 Well, yes. Then the authority section of the parent is returned. But there's no referral at all, so even this is correct. > The wrong behaviour makes it impossible to use it for the .de TLD because the > DENIC > rejectes requests for a domain based on a namesserver with the first > response. I personally don't think this is a big problem, as the 1st. answer > in not the DENIC expected result, but it's not totaly wrong. Many people, including myself, are using MyDNS below the .de TLD. You fed MyDNS invalid data (invalid as in wrong expectations from your side). MyDNS is quite RFC-compliant. Apart from that you wanted ". 604800 IN NS 0 ns1.std-service.com". Kind regards, Philipp Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
