rfc1912.txt
来自「RFC 的详细文档!」· 文本 代码 · 共 900 行 · 第 1/3 页
TXT
900 行
podunk.xx. IN NS ns1
IN NS ns2
IN CNAME mary
mary IN A 1.2.3.4
This is often attempted by inexperienced administrators as an obvious
way to allow your domain name to also be a host. However, DNS
servers like BIND will see the CNAME and refuse to add any other
resources for that name. Since no other records are allowed to
coexist with a CNAME, the NS entries are ignored. Therefore all the
hosts in the podunk.xx domain are ignored as well!
If you want to have your domain also be a host, do the following:
podunk.xx. IN NS ns1
IN NS ns2
IN A 1.2.3.4
mary IN A 1.2.3.4
Don't go overboard with CNAMEs. Use them when renaming hosts, but
plan to get rid of them (and inform your users). However CNAMEs are
useful (and encouraged) for generalized names for servers -- `ftp'
for your ftp server, `www' for your Web server, `gopher' for your
Gopher server, `news' for your Usenet news server, etc.
Don't forget to delete the CNAMEs associated with a host if you
delete the host it is an alias for. Such "stale CNAMEs" are a waste
of resources.
Barr Informational [Page 6]
RFC 1912 Common DNS Errors February 1996
Don't use CNAMEs in combination with RRs which point to other names
like MX, CNAME, PTR and NS. (PTR is an exception if you want to
implement classless in-addr delegation.) For example, this is
strongly discouraged:
podunk.xx. IN MX mailhost
mailhost IN CNAME mary
mary IN A 1.2.3.4
[RFC 1034] in section 3.6.2 says this should not be done, and [RFC
974] explicitly states that MX records shall not point to an alias
defined by a CNAME. This results in unnecessary indirection in
accessing the data, and DNS resolvers and servers need to work more
to get the answer. If you really want to do this, you can accomplish
the same thing by using a preprocessor such as m4 on your host files.
Also, having chained records such as CNAMEs pointing to CNAMEs may
make administration issues easier, but is known to tickle bugs in
some resolvers that fail to check loops correctly. As a result some
hosts may not be able to resolve such names.
Having NS records pointing to a CNAME is bad and may conflict badly
with current BIND servers. In fact, current BIND implementations
will ignore such records, possibly leading to a lame delegation.
There is a certain amount of security checking done in BIND to
prevent spoofing DNS NS records. Also, older BIND servers reportedly
will get caught in an infinite query loop trying to figure out the
address for the aliased nameserver, causing a continuous stream of
DNS requests to be sent.
2.5 MX records
It is a good idea to give every host an MX record, even if it points
to itself! Some mailers will cache MX records, but will always need
to check for an MX before sending mail. If a site does not have an
MX, then every piece of mail may result in one more resolver query,
since the answer to the MX query often also contains the IP addresses
of the MX hosts. Internet SMTP mailers are required by [RFC 1123] to
support the MX mechanism.
Put MX records even on hosts that aren't intended to send or receive
e-mail. If there is a security problem involving one of these hosts,
some people will mistakenly send mail to postmaster or root at the
site without checking first to see if it is a "real" host or just a
terminal or personal computer that's not set up to accept e-mail. If
you give it an MX record, then the e-mail can be redirected to a real
person. Otherwise mail can just sit in a queue for hours or days
Barr Informational [Page 7]
RFC 1912 Common DNS Errors February 1996
until the mailer gives up trying to send it.
Don't forget that whenever you add an MX record, you need to inform
the target mailer if it is to treat the first host as "local". (The
"Cw" flag in sendmail, for example)
If you add an MX record which points to an external host (e.g., for
the purposes of backup mail routing) be sure to ask permission from
that site first. Otherwise that site could get rather upset and take
action (like throw your mail away, or appeal to higher authorities
like your parent DNS administrator or network provider.)
2.6 Other Resource Records
2.6.1 WKS
WKS records are deprecated in [RFC 1123]. They serve no known useful
function, except internally among LISP machines. Don't use them.
2.6.2 HINFO
On the issue HINFO records, some will argue that these is a security
problem (by broadcasting what vendor hardware and operating system
you so people can run systematic attacks on known vendor security
holes). If you do use them, you should keep up to date with known
vendor security problems. However, they serve a useful purpose.
Don't forget that HINFO requires two arguments, the hardware type,
and the operating system.
HINFO is sometimes abused to provide other information. The record
is meant to provide specific information about the machine itself.
If you need to express other information about the host in the DNS,
use TXT.
2.6.3 TXT
TXT records have no specific definition. You can put most anything
in them. Some use it for a generic description of the host, some put
specific information like its location, primary user, or maybe even a
phone number.
2.6.4 RP
RP records are relatively new. They are used to specify an e-mail
address (see first paragraph of section 2.2) of the "Responsible
Person" of the host, and the name of a TXT record where you can get
more information. See [RFC 1183].
Barr Informational [Page 8]
RFC 1912 Common DNS Errors February 1996
2.7 Wildcard records
Wildcard MXs are useful mostly for non IP-connected sites. A common
mistake is thinking that a wildcard MX for a zone will apply to all
hosts in the zone. A wildcard MX will apply only to names in the
zone which aren't listed in the DNS at all. e.g.,
podunk.xx. IN NS ns1
IN NS ns2
mary IN A 1.2.3.4
*.podunk.xx. IN MX 5 sue
Mail for mary.podunk.xx will be sent to itself for delivery. Only
mail for jane.podunk.xx or any hosts you don't see above will be sent
to the MX. For most Internet sites, wildcard MX records are not
useful. You need to put explicit MX records on every host.
Wildcard MXs can be bad, because they make some operations succeed
when they should fail instead. Consider the case where someone in
the domain "widget.com" tries to send mail to "joe@larry". If the
host "larry" doesn't actually exist, the mail should in fact bounce
immediately. But because of domain searching the address gets
resolved to "larry.widget.com", and because of the wildcard MX this
is a valid address according to DNS. Or perhaps someone simply made
a typo in the hostname portion of the address. The mail message then
gets routed to the mail host, which then rejects the mail with
strange error messages like "I refuse to talk to myself" or "Local
configuration error".
Wildcard MX records are good for when you have a large number of
hosts which are not directly Internet-connected (for example, behind
a firewall) and for administrative or political reasons it is too
difficult to have individual MX records for every host, or to force
all e-mail addresses to be "hidden" behind one or more domain names.
In that case, you must divide your DNS into two parts, an internal
DNS, and an external DNS. The external DNS will have only a few
hosts and explicit MX records, and one or more wildcard MXs for each
internal domain. Internally the DNS will be complete, with all
explicit MX records and no wildcards.
Wildcard As and CNAMEs are possible too, and are really confusing to
users, and a potential nightmare if used without thinking first. It
could result (due again to domain searching) in any telnet/ftp
attempts from within the domain to unknown hosts to be directed to
one address. One such wildcard CNAME (in *.edu.com) caused
Internet-wide loss of services and potential security nightmares due
to unexpected interactions with domain searching. It resulted in
swift fixes, and even an RFC ([RFC 1535]) documenting the problem.
Barr Informational [Page 9]
RFC 1912 Common DNS Errors February 1996
2.8 Authority and Delegation Errors (NS records)
You are required to have at least two nameservers for every domain,
though more is preferred. Have secondaries outside your network. If
the secondary isn't under your control, periodically check up on them
and make sure they're getting current zone data from you. Queries to
their nameserver about your hosts should always result in an
"authoritative" response. If not, this is called a "lame
delegation". A lame delegations exists when a nameserver is
delegated responsibility for providing nameservice for a zone (via NS
records) but is not performing nameservice for that zone (usually
because it is not set up as a primary or secondary for the zone).
The "classic" lame delegation can be illustrated in this example:
podunk.xx. IN NS ns1.podunk.xx.
IN NS ns0.widget.com.
"podunk.xx" is a new domain which has recently been created, and
"ns1.podunk.xx" has been set up to perform nameservice for the zone.
They haven't quite finished everything yet and haven't made sure that
the hostmaster at "ns0.widget.com" has set up to be a proper
secondary, and thus has no information about the podunk.xx domain,
even though the DNS says it is supposed to. Various things can
happen depending on which nameserver is used. At best, extra DNS
traffic will result from a lame delegation. At worst, you can get
unresolved hosts and bounced e-mail.
Also, sometimes a nameserver is moved to another host or removed from
the list of secondaries. Unfortunately due to caching of NS records,
many sites will still think that a host is a secondary after that
host has stopped providing nameservice. In order to prevent lame
delegations while the cache is being aged, continue to provide
nameservice on the old nameserver for the length of the maximum of
the minimum plus refresh times for the zone and the parent zone.
(See section 2.2)
Whenever a primary or secondary is removed or changed, it takes a
fair amount of human coordination among the parties involved. (The
site itself, it's parent, and the site hosting the secondary) When a
primary moves, make sure all secondaries have their named.boot files
updated and their servers reloaded. When a secondary moves, make
sure the address records at both the primary and parent level are
changed.
It's also been reported that some distant sites like to pick popular
nameservers like "ns.uu.net" and just add it to their list of NS
records in hopes that they will magically perform additional
Barr Informational [Page 10]
RFC 1912 Common DNS Errors February 1996
nameservice for them. This is an even worse form of lame delegation,
since this adds traffic to an already busy nameserver. Please
contact the hostmasters of sites which have lame delegations.
Various tools can be used to detect or actively find lame
delegations. See the list of contributed software in the BIND
distribution.
Make sure your parent domain has the same NS records for your zone as
you do. (Don't forget your in-addr.arpa zones too!). Do not list
too many (7 is the recommended maximum), as this just makes things
harder to manage and is only really necessary for very popular top-
level or root zones. You also run the risk of overflowing the 512-
byte limit of a UDP packet in the response to an NS query. If this
happens, resolvers will "fall back" to using TCP requests, resulting
in increased load on your nameserver.
It's important when picking geographic locations for secondary
nameservers to minimize latency as well as increase reliability.
Keep in mind network topologies. For example if your site is on the
other end of a slow local or international link, consider a secondary
on the other side of the link to decrease average latency. Contact
your Internet service provider or parent domain contact for more
information about secondaries which may be available to you.
3. BIND operation
This section discusses common problems people have in the actual
operation of the nameserver (specifically, BIND). Not only must the
data be correct as explained above, but the nameserver must be
operated correctly for the data to be made available.
3.1 Serial numbers
Each zone has a serial number associated with it. Its use is for
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码Ctrl + C
搜索代码Ctrl + F
全屏模式F11
增大字号Ctrl + =
减小字号Ctrl + -
显示快捷键?