John A. Martin [jam(_at_)jamux(_dot_)com] wrote:
Julian Mehnle wrote:
195.30.85.225 has many names, probably more than 100, including
"io.mehnle.net", "mail.mehnle.net", and "mehnle.net". I don't see a
problem here. Do you?
I would be inclined to use "mehnle.net" as the collective without an A
RR and the others as synonyms for a particular host with an A RR and
CNAME RRs or multiple A RRs or both.
But you don't really see a problem with the way _I_ view it, do you?
[...] I only wanted to suggest _not to encourage_ the overloading,
not to go hammer and tongs on a crusade against it.
What overloading? Sorry if I'm being stupid.
A formal definition from Object Oriented programming is often given as
something like: [...]
By extension or slang the term _overloading_ is used to indicate an
ambiguous use of a name, word, label, or some such. [...]
I'm sorry if my usage has been abstruse.
I know what "overloading" means (or I would have asked "what _is_
overloading?"). I just wasn't sure what aspect of my setup you considered
"overloading". That I use "mehnle.net" as a domain name as well as a host
name?
If that's what you meant, then it is because the DNS RFCs don't make any
distinction between the two that would contradict my view. To also be a
host name, a domain name just has to have an A record (and satisfy some
syntax requirements). There is no deeper concept of "host name vs. domain
name". The host name "io.mehnle.net" is still a domain name, too, even if
you don't want it to, and even if there are no further hosts in the "io"
sub-domain.