domain name system - Is it possible to simplify my website DNS records?

Let's say I have mydomain.com and my shared webhost server is 1.2.3.4. My domain registrar and webhosting company are 2 different entities.

Currently I have my DNS records configured like this in my registrar DNS Management section:

A
*.mydomain.com
1.2.3.4

A
mydomain.com
1.2.3.4


CNAME
ftp.mydomain.com
mydomain.com

CNAME
www.mydomain.com
mydomain.com

A
subdomain1.mydomain.com

1.2.3.4

A
subdomain2.mydomain.com
1.2.3.4

A
subdomainN.mydomain.com
1.2.3.4

I have 2 questions/problems:

1) Is there any way to simplify the sub-domain A records so that every time I need to add a new sub-domain to my website I shouldn't have to create a new A record for it in the DNS Management?

2) With the current configuration when the user points to any sub-domain that don't exist (for instance: idontexist.mydomain.com) a default page from cPanel is displayed. I suppose this is the normal behavior? Or should it return a 404 error? If so, how can I make it return a 404 error?

Answer

You've already done it; that * record covers all names not specifically defined.

That message is due to the domain being unconfigured, but the users are still getting sent to your server via the wildcard DNS entry. If there was no DNS covering that subdomain, then they wouldn't make it to your server for cpanel to error or to get a 404 at all; they'd get a browser error that the domain could not be found.

Since all requests for subdomains will come to the web server, probably the best way for you to handle this would be a friendly error page about nothing existing at that location.

Comments

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

Blog

Search This Blog