On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Mark Andrewsma...@isc.org wrote:
RRsets are unordered. Software and configurations should
be prepared for this. Where ordering is required it is
built into the RR type.
Mark
On 14.07.09 14:02, Bryan Irvine wrote:
I've think
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Mark Andrewsma...@isc.org wrote:
RRsets are unordered. Software and configurations should
be prepared for this. Where ordering is required it is
built into the RR type.
Mark
On 14.07.09
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Mark Andrewsma...@isc.org wrote:
In message 53d706300907081412r191946eeo5c9a66657bf8e...@mail.gmail.com,
Bryan
Irvine writes:
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Kevin Darcyk...@chrysler.com wrote:
Bryan Irvine wrote:
Other than to really annoy me; =A0is
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Kevin Darcyk...@chrysler.com wrote:
Bryan Irvine wrote:
Other than to really annoy me; is there a valid reason for rr rDNS?
Once upon a time, BIND specifically *disabled* round-robin behavior for
non-address (A/) record types. PTR RRsets, among other
In message 53d706300907081412r191946eeo5c9a66657bf8e...@mail.gmail.com, Bryan
Irvine writes:
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Kevin Darcyk...@chrysler.com wrote:
Bryan Irvine wrote:
Other than to really annoy me; =A0is there a valid reason for rr rDNS?
Once upon a time, BIND
Other than to really annoy me; is there a valid reason for rr rDNS?
-Bryan
___
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
Bryan Irvine wrote:
Other than to really annoy me; is there a valid reason for rr rDNS?
Once upon a time, BIND specifically *disabled* round-robin behavior for
non-address (A/) record types. PTR RRsets, among other types, were
always given in a fixed order.
But, I just tried a quick
7 matches
Mail list logo
