[ On Tuesday, January 6, 2004 at 20:13:02 (+0100), Giuliano Gavazzi wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: [Exim] Problems caused by localhost entry in Received
>
> Now well OT...
MTA operators need good DNS and all too often it seems they don't have
good DNS experts locally to call upon. :-)
> At 12:45 pm -0500 2004/01/06, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > Every nameveserver should of course be loaded with a "localhost" zone
> > that has _only_ a single A record and of course at least one NS record
> > and an SOA record.
>
> I agree (and I do so, although I do not know if it is in any RFC).
Not that this kind of thing would really need to be in any RFC to make
it valid and proper, but yes it's in at least RFC 1912 and also noted in
RFC 2606.
> > If, and only if, you really want a "localhost.your.domain" name as well
> > then you really should make that a CNAME in your local zone.
>
> not really (see below).
Yes, _REALLY_. :-) (see below :-)
> > I.e. at minimum the following:
> >
> > $ORIGIN localhost.
> > $TTL 24w
> > . IN SOA localhost. hostmaster.localhost. (
> > 1 8h 2h 24w 16h )
> > . IN NS localhost.
> > . IN A 127.0.0.1
> >
> > $ORIGIN 127.in-addr.arpa.
> > $TTL 24w
> > 1.0.0.127.in-addr.arpa. IN PTR localhost.
>
> are you sure it is ok to put data belonging to different zones in the
> same file? Where would I put the SOA for 0.0.127.in-addr.arpa and how
> would I tell the server that it is primary for both zones? I guess
> your example is only written in pseudo-configuration mode, so to
> speak.
Yes, BIND does allow data from different zones in the same file, that's
what the "$ORIGN" setting controls.
However as you've guessed what I show above is not intended to be the
same file -- it's just an example.
Why don't you download my example configs and look at them to see the
complete file content?
> Also, can a zone be self referential?
Of course.
> Or is there glue code in
> the root servers for the nameserver localhost.?
no -- that's why every nameserver should be "privately authoritative"
for the localhost TLD.
> Or should localhost.
> in the SOA and NS records substituted with the nameserver's FQDN? (I
> do this way).
No, and it should not be. This is just "localhost" and nothing more.
> RFC1537:
>
> Note that all domains that contain hosts should have a "localhost" A
> record in them.
Note that RFC 1537 has long ago been deprecated by RFC 1912. Never stop
at one place when you're reading RFCs, even if you think you've found
the answer you're looking for. :-)
> > ftp://ftp.weird.com/pub/local/named-sample-conf.src.shar
>
> no thanks, I find the RFC and BIND documentation clear enough.
Trust me -- you really do want to look at the examples I provide. You
will not find all the details I outline in any other single place, and
given the questions you've asked these examples will help you understand
the RFCs and BIND documentation a lot more than you already appear to.
There is a great deal there other than the "localhost" and 127/8 stuff.
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP RoboHack <woods@???>
Planix, Inc. <woods@???> Secrets of the Weird <woods@???>
