Mixing
Can BIND setup with only A names and fully qualified host names work properly?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I recently came across a zone file for BIND which used only Address records with fully qualified domain names for each IP.
Example snippet:
subdomain1.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
subdomain2.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
subdomain3.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
There are also multiple fully qualified names resolving to the same IP addresses.
Is there a issue with this configuration? (i.e. not using CNAME or ALIAS?)
Can this be done or will it cause issues?
Since I am not an expert I assume some issues include:
- Reverse lookup. (first response is considered correct?)
- Certificates (if not first response then cert error?)
linux domain-name-system bind internal-dns
edited 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
asked 1 hour ago
Nathan McCoy
160210
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I recently came across a zone file for BIND which used only Address records with fully qualified domain names for each IP.
Example snippet:
subdomain1.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
subdomain2.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
subdomain3.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
There are also multiple fully qualified names resolving to the same IP addresses.
Is there a issue with this configuration? (i.e. not using CNAME or ALIAS?)
Can this be done or will it cause issues?
Since I am not an expert I assume some issues include:
- Reverse lookup. (first response is considered correct?)
- Certificates (if not first response then cert error?)
linux domain-name-system bind internal-dns
edited 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
asked 1 hour ago
Nathan McCoy
160210
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I recently came across a zone file for BIND which used only Address records with fully qualified domain names for each IP.
Example snippet:
subdomain1.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
subdomain2.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
subdomain3.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
There are also multiple fully qualified names resolving to the same IP addresses.
Is there a issue with this configuration? (i.e. not using CNAME or ALIAS?)
Can this be done or will it cause issues?
Since I am not an expert I assume some issues include:
- Reverse lookup. (first response is considered correct?)
- Certificates (if not first response then cert error?)
linux domain-name-system bind internal-dns
edited 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
asked 1 hour ago
Nathan McCoy
160210
I recently came across a zone file for BIND which used only Address records with fully qualified domain names for each IP.
Example snippet:
subdomain1.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
subdomain2.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
subdomain3.example.com. IN A 192.168.1.10
There are also multiple fully qualified names resolving to the same IP addresses.
Is there a issue with this configuration? (i.e. not using CNAME or ALIAS?)
Can this be done or will it cause issues?
Since I am not an expert I assume some issues include:
- Reverse lookup. (first response is considered correct?)
- Certificates (if not first response then cert error?)
linux domain-name-system bind internal-dns
linux domain-name-system bind internal-dns
edited 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
asked 1 hour ago
Nathan McCoy
160210
edited 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
asked 1 hour ago
Nathan McCoy
160210
edited 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
edited 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
edited 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
51k1083137
asked 1 hour ago
Nathan McCoy
160210
asked 1 hour ago
Nathan McCoy
160210
asked 1 hour ago
Nathan McCoy
160210
160210
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
It's perfectly valid to have multiple A records pointing to the same IP. Reverse lookup has nothing to do with it; as that would a) be in a separate zone and b) would be using PTR records. Certificates are also irrelevant here.
answered 1 hour ago
bodgit
2,752520
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
That is only a forward zone and as @bodgit answered that is perfectly valid for all use cases.
The main potential disadvantage of the above is an administrative one. For a single zone not too much of an issue but with many host names in many different domains much more so: in case of a change of ip-address every A record with that ip-address will need to be updated, where CNAME records will automtically follow the ip-address change of their target FQDN and would not need to be updated.
For a reverse zone, doing something almost similar is AFAIK also technically valid:
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain1.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain2.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain3.example.com.
but that won't have the effect people usually seem to expect.
subdomain1.example.com. will always point to 192.168.1.10 but the reverse lookup will most of the time NOT point back to subdomain1.example.com.
The above will become a round-robin DNS record where 1/3 of the responses will return an "incorrect" response of subdomain2.example.com. , 1/3 of the responses will return an also "incorrect" response of subdomain3.example.com. and only a 33% chance exists that the "correct" response of subdomain1.example.com. will be seen.
answered 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
It's perfectly valid to have multiple A records pointing to the same IP. Reverse lookup has nothing to do with it; as that would a) be in a separate zone and b) would be using PTR records. Certificates are also irrelevant here.
answered 1 hour ago
bodgit
2,752520
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
It's perfectly valid to have multiple A records pointing to the same IP. Reverse lookup has nothing to do with it; as that would a) be in a separate zone and b) would be using PTR records. Certificates are also irrelevant here.
answered 1 hour ago
bodgit
2,752520
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
It's perfectly valid to have multiple A records pointing to the same IP. Reverse lookup has nothing to do with it; as that would a) be in a separate zone and b) would be using PTR records. Certificates are also irrelevant here.
answered 1 hour ago
bodgit
2,752520
It's perfectly valid to have multiple A records pointing to the same IP. Reverse lookup has nothing to do with it; as that would a) be in a separate zone and b) would be using PTR records. Certificates are also irrelevant here.
answered 1 hour ago
bodgit
2,752520
answered 1 hour ago
bodgit
2,752520
answered 1 hour ago
bodgit
2,752520
answered 1 hour ago
bodgit
2,752520
2,752520
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
That is only a forward zone and as @bodgit answered that is perfectly valid for all use cases.
The main potential disadvantage of the above is an administrative one. For a single zone not too much of an issue but with many host names in many different domains much more so: in case of a change of ip-address every A record with that ip-address will need to be updated, where CNAME records will automtically follow the ip-address change of their target FQDN and would not need to be updated.
For a reverse zone, doing something almost similar is AFAIK also technically valid:
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain1.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain2.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain3.example.com.
but that won't have the effect people usually seem to expect.
subdomain1.example.com. will always point to 192.168.1.10 but the reverse lookup will most of the time NOT point back to subdomain1.example.com.
The above will become a round-robin DNS record where 1/3 of the responses will return an "incorrect" response of subdomain2.example.com. , 1/3 of the responses will return an also "incorrect" response of subdomain3.example.com. and only a 33% chance exists that the "correct" response of subdomain1.example.com. will be seen.
answered 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
That is only a forward zone and as @bodgit answered that is perfectly valid for all use cases.
The main potential disadvantage of the above is an administrative one. For a single zone not too much of an issue but with many host names in many different domains much more so: in case of a change of ip-address every A record with that ip-address will need to be updated, where CNAME records will automtically follow the ip-address change of their target FQDN and would not need to be updated.
For a reverse zone, doing something almost similar is AFAIK also technically valid:
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain1.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain2.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain3.example.com.
but that won't have the effect people usually seem to expect.
subdomain1.example.com. will always point to 192.168.1.10 but the reverse lookup will most of the time NOT point back to subdomain1.example.com.
The above will become a round-robin DNS record where 1/3 of the responses will return an "incorrect" response of subdomain2.example.com. , 1/3 of the responses will return an also "incorrect" response of subdomain3.example.com. and only a 33% chance exists that the "correct" response of subdomain1.example.com. will be seen.
answered 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
That is only a forward zone and as @bodgit answered that is perfectly valid for all use cases.
The main potential disadvantage of the above is an administrative one. For a single zone not too much of an issue but with many host names in many different domains much more so: in case of a change of ip-address every A record with that ip-address will need to be updated, where CNAME records will automtically follow the ip-address change of their target FQDN and would not need to be updated.
For a reverse zone, doing something almost similar is AFAIK also technically valid:
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain1.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain2.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain3.example.com.
but that won't have the effect people usually seem to expect.
subdomain1.example.com. will always point to 192.168.1.10 but the reverse lookup will most of the time NOT point back to subdomain1.example.com.
The above will become a round-robin DNS record where 1/3 of the responses will return an "incorrect" response of subdomain2.example.com. , 1/3 of the responses will return an also "incorrect" response of subdomain3.example.com. and only a 33% chance exists that the "correct" response of subdomain1.example.com. will be seen.
answered 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
That is only a forward zone and as @bodgit answered that is perfectly valid for all use cases.
The main potential disadvantage of the above is an administrative one. For a single zone not too much of an issue but with many host names in many different domains much more so: in case of a change of ip-address every A record with that ip-address will need to be updated, where CNAME records will automtically follow the ip-address change of their target FQDN and would not need to be updated.
For a reverse zone, doing something almost similar is AFAIK also technically valid:
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain1.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain2.example.com.
10.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR subdomain3.example.com.
but that won't have the effect people usually seem to expect.
subdomain1.example.com. will always point to 192.168.1.10 but the reverse lookup will most of the time NOT point back to subdomain1.example.com.
The above will become a round-robin DNS record where 1/3 of the responses will return an "incorrect" response of subdomain2.example.com. , 1/3 of the responses will return an also "incorrect" response of subdomain3.example.com. and only a 33% chance exists that the "correct" response of subdomain1.example.com. will be seen.
answered 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
edited 10 mins ago
answered 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
answered 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
answered 36 mins ago
HBruijn
51k1083137
51k1083137
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f938084%2fcan-bind-setup-with-only-a-names-and-fully-qualified-host-names-work-properly%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password