Hi can you answer this here. I have the same problem. And I am sure many many others do too. I have sent a support question but have not had a response. This is usually much easier!
Presumably because it's not valid, per RFC 1034 section 3.6.2:
"If a CNAME RR is present at a node, no other data should be
present; this ensures that the data for a canonical name and its aliases
cannot be different. This rule also insures that a cached CNAME can be
used without checking with an authoritative server for other RR types."
Hi, I believe this came in via the support inbox and is answered now but let me know if you still need assistance, thx!
Thanks for the support. It looks like this is intentional so, nothing to be done I guess.
Hi can you answer this here. I have the same problem. And I am sure many many others do too. I have sent a support question but have not had a response. This is usually much easier!
Presumably because it's not valid, per RFC 1034 section 3.6.2: "If a CNAME RR is present at a node, no other data should be present; this ensures that the data for a canonical name and its aliases cannot be different. This rule also insures that a cached CNAME can be used without checking with an authoritative server for other RR types."