From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id p6TI5Tsg029660 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 20:05:30 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhwDAEn1Mk5beRpVbmdsb2JhbAApCwEBBAFdKBILEFZRBxenbxRCIYh8Ar5lhkEEknqQZQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,288,1309730400"; d="scan'208";a="114475723" Received: from givry.fdupont.fr ([91.121.26.85]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 29 Jul 2011 20:05:30 +0200 Received: from givry.fdupont.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by givry.fdupont.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p6TI5Tpm002792; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 20:05:29 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.fdupont.fr) Message-Id: <201107291805.p6TI5Tpm002792@givry.fdupont.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Xavier Leroy cc: caml-list@inria.fr In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 29 Jul 2011 19:34:02 +0200. <4E32EF0A.90300@inria.fr> Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 20:05:29 +0200 Sender: Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Great Renaming In your previous mail you wrote: On 07/29/2011 06:59 PM, Sylvain Le Gall wrote: > Another side effect: caml.inria.fr points to active-dvi ! Unrelated, but thanks for reporting it. It seems that INRIA's DNS is broken and reports two different IP addresses for caml.inria.fr, the correct one and the one of the server hosting advi.inria.fr... => I've tried all servers of inria.fr and all answered with a CNAME to pauillac.inria.fr (i.e., caml is an alias of pauillac) which has the address 128.93.11.35 (IPv4, no IPv6 address) and BTW is an alias of advi.inria.fr too (i.e., advi has a CNAME pointing to pauillac). Note this is not necessary what you can get as DNS records can be cached and according to what I can see in this case for up to 2 days. > Do you plan to keep caml.inria.fr as well? or to add ocaml.inria.fr? => the simplest should be to add ocaml as an alias of caml (note if caml is itself an alias ocaml must point to the canonical name: CNAME chains are forbidden by RFCs so can't be assumed to work well everywhere). Regards Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr PS: Xavier, passe le bonjour de ma part...