On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
uh...@fantomas.sk wrote:
When i tried this host did not resolve
the cname. i.e a host 1.1.1.1 returned metis.local. it did not know
to resolve metis.local as bob
the host 1.1.1.1 returned that 1.1.1.1.in-addr.arpa is a CNAME to
-Original Message-
[ ... ]
On 23.01.09 23:06, Barry Margolin wrote:
Why don't you just use normal reverse DNS:
zone for 1.1.1.in-addr.arpa
1 IN PTR metis.local.
IN PTR bob-www-sol-l01.local.
accorging to the above, metis.local is a CNAME, so the
reverse should
On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 4:06 AM, Barry Margolin bar...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
Why don't you just use normal reverse DNS:
zone for 1.1.1.in-addr.arpa
1 IN PTR metis.local.
IN PTR bob-www-sol-l01.local.
I read there were problems having 2 PTR records for the same ip. I
know its in the RFC but
On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
uh...@fantomas.sk wrote:
if metis.local is a CNAME, the PTR shouldn't point to it.
On 25.01.09 10:14, John Bond wrote:
could you please explain this.
Although it's good to remove irelevant part of the text you are replying to,
this
In article gld0if$3c...@sf1.isc.org,
John Bond john.r.b...@gmail.com wrote:
My idea was to create records like the following
zone for .local
bob-www-sol-l01 IN A 1.1.1.1
metisIN CNAME bob-www-sol-l01
zone for 1.1.1
1
Hello All,
Sorry for the bad subject but i wasn't really sure how i could best
describe my circumstances. I would like to ask anyone out there if
something im proposing to implment is incorrect or just plain stupid.
Ok so the situation is that we have one set of developers who like to
call there
In article gld0if$3c...@sf1.isc.org,
John Bond john.r.b...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All,
Sorry for the bad subject but i wasn't really sure how i could best
describe my circumstances. I would like to ask anyone out there if
something im proposing to implment is incorrect or just plain
7 matches
Mail list logo
