[dns-operations] Any DNAME usage experience?

[John Levine]

In article <20200330011121.GL41308 at straasha.imrryr.org> you write:
>On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 06:46:30PM -0400, John Levine wrote:
>
>> >Bottom-line, they're used infrequently, but they do seem to work.
>> 
>> In the DNS sense, sure they work.
>> 
>> In the application sense, I doubt it.  When I looked through the .CAT
>> DNAMEs for www.<accented>.cat I don't think I found any web servers
>> that gave me what looked like a deliberate answer rather than a
>> default or error page.  I'd be quite surprised if there were many web
>> or mail servers in Taiwan or Iran that gave reasonable responses to
>> their DNAME'd names.
>
>Of course, as you well know, Web != Internet, but even restricted to the
>web (since you appeared to issue a challenge) I naturally had to find a
>counter-example:
>
>    http://xn--4gq43txlz.xn--kpry57d
>    http://xn--4gq43txlz.xn--kprw13d

I think that works by accident with the site being the server's default,
You can find it at the IP address http://203.74.178.22/ also.

>Yes, it seems to be rather the exception than the rule.  For bonus
>points, here are two sites that have rather different content:
>
>    http://xn--4pz14j.xn--kpry57d
>    http://xn--4pz14j.xn--kprw13d
>
>despite the latter being a DNAME synthesised alias for the former.

Hey, I didn't say none.

I think we agree that DNAMEs for web sites could work if people wanted
them to, but for the most part they don't, so they don't.

R's,
John