[Kroupware] FAQ: flexible administration of multiple kolab servers

[Brad Hards]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:58, Martin Konold wrote:
> > > This is indeed a vaild point. Which kind of disadvantages do I have to
> > > expect when using CNAMES? What about SMTP?
> >
> > I don't think that there will be any. Most people already use CNAMEs to
> > point to major servers, including POP3 and SMTP. Your ISP probably does
> > this. sendmail is probably the worst case. It doesn't like to see CNAMEs
> > on the right hand side of a MX record, and may not strip off the right
> > parts. This usually leads to mail looping. But presumably you weren't
> > planning to use those records for MX anyway, so it won't matter.
>
> I am not sure. It can be useful in the future to be able to also use MX
> records.
This doesn't make much sense.
Your MX records probably look something like:
kde.org.                900     IN      MX      10 mail.kde.org.
kde.org.                900     IN      MX      20 office.kde.org.

mail.kde.org and office.kde.org are going to be major machines. It is no big 
deal to put the A records on the RH side.
You wouldn't have something like:
kde.org.                900     IN      MX      10 hans_mayer_kde_org.kde.org.
kde.org.                900     IN      MX      20 brad_hards_kde_org.kde.org.

Or am I missing what you are trying to do?

Brad

- -- 
http://conf.linux.org.au. 22-25Jan2003. Perth, Aust. Tickets booked.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9mBVkW6pHgIdAuOMRApr5AJ9faE+pkMuCcXlRJxS6efdbfusbMACeIJ3U
llKJB/YjBmRe6tAtsum7yL8=
=efnr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----