Hi Everyone, I am currently reviewing the DNS records for the organization I work for and have one area I would like other peoples thoughts on. Would there ever be a situation where you need to have multiple A records pointing to the same IP Address? Currently we have a small number of cases where one IP Address has multiple A Records. This seems like a bad idea to me and I would replace these records with cnames. But I am meeting resistance to this. As far as I can think right now if you have one correctly configured A record with a matching reverse entry and then use cnames there shouldn't be any cases where you must add a second A record. Or am I missing something ?
On May 15, 2008, at 7:34 PM, Clint Dilks wrote:> I am currently reviewing the DNS records for the organization I work > for and have one area I would like other peoples thoughts on. Would > there ever be a situation where you need to have multiple A records > pointing to the same IP Address? > > Currently we have a small number of cases where one IP Address has > multiple A Records. This seems like a bad idea to me and I would > replace these records with cnames. But I am meeting resistance to > this. As far as I can think right now if you have one correctly > configured A record with a matching reverse entry and then use > cnames there shouldn't be any cases where you must add a second A > record. Or am I missing something ?A shared web server is a good example of multiple As resolving to the same IP. CNAMEs require two dips into the DNS (one to get the CNAME, another to look up the IP), and so can be much slower if you are the victim of a slow resolver. --Chris
Clint Dilks wrote:> Hi Everyone, > > I am currently reviewing the DNS records for the organization I work > for and have one area I would like other peoples thoughts on. Would > there ever be a situation where you need to have multiple A records > pointing to the same IP Address? > > Currently we have a small number of cases where one IP Address has > multiple A Records. This seems like a bad idea to me and I would > replace these records with cnames. But I am meeting resistance to > this. As far as I can think right now if you have one correctly > configured A record with a matching reverse entry and then use cnames > there shouldn't be any cases where you must add a second A record. Or > am I missing something ? > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >Thanks for the responses :) Much appreciated