Skip to main content

domain name system - DNS: CNAME as www record



I'm considering changing the DNS www records of a domain name from an A record to a CNAME. Various questions and answers on serverfault are not as clear cut as I'd hoped. Also, many DNS checking tools like DNSsy or intoDNS have as a check the fact that the www record is not a CNAME, is an A record, pointing to a public IP address.



In my case, I want to point my domain's www record to an Amazon Web Services load balancer which I can only do with a CNAME. What would be the best way to achieve that?


Answer



If you are concerned about this issue, you can use Route 53 and ELB together to get what you want. Create the www record as an A record, then select the "Alias" option and the interface will allow you to select an AWS-specific target to point the record to. So the ELB has to exist first, then you can create the Alias to it.



So you start to create a new A record in Route 53 as usual, but you click on the "Alias" option right under the host name. The freeform text block will disappear and you will be given the ability to select your ELB under "Alias Target". Select your ELB and save the change. You will then have an A record that points to www, which will be your ELB.




(The above info about the Route 53 UI has been corrected from the original error.)



This is a special Route 53 feature most often used to handle serving from the domain apex, where A records are required. But it can also be used for subdomains such as www. Basically, it's an A record that acts like a CNAME within the confines of AWS. Using this feature, DNS tools will find an A record.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able