wget not resolving domain names

[Paul Howarth]

Tim wrote:
> Paul Howarth:
> 
> 
>>>They're useful as long as you know what you're doing :-)
>>>Too bad too many people don't :-(
> 
> 
> Derek Martin:
> 
> 
>>I don't really agree; they're totally redundant.  You're better off
>>just using an A record.  That will always behave intuitively and
>>completely avoids all the stupid problems associated with CNAMEs.
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that CNAMEs were supposed to act as some sort
> of redirecting instruction (this is the name that you should be using,
> it's the one we consider canonical), so stop using the other domain name
> you original tried to use.  Though nothing appears to work that way.
> 
> e.g. For DNS records like this
> 
> print     A      192.168.1.10
> printer   CNAME  print
> printers  CNAME  print
> printing  CNAME  print
> 
> Where you're wanting people to use "print" (+ domain name) as the
> address for your printer, but somewhere along the line people have been
> using other addresses you'd like them to no-longer use, but don't want
> to block from being used.

You can look at it that way, but the people using the "deprecated" names 
never get any indication that the name they're using isn't the "right" 
one, at least not via the DNS itself (a web-based service could use a 
redirect when accessed with a deprecated hostname in HTTP 1.1).

Another traditional use was for providing named hosts for each service 
and then providing all services on one host, e.g.

myserver	A	10.0.0.1
ftp		CNAME	myserver
www		CNAME	myserver
rsync		CNAME	myserver

If the load became too high, each service could then be split off onto 
separate machines:

myserver	A	10.0.0.1
myserver2	A	10.0.0.2
myserver3	A	10.0.0.3
ftp		CNAME	myserver
www		CNAME	myserver2
rsync		CNAME	myserver3

This would all be transparent to people using the "ftp", "www", and 
"rsync" aliases.

Paul.