E-Mails, DNS via DA - AlmaLinux10

[DrWizzle]

Good morning to you too Sir,

I'm not great at explaining certain things, although I understand how they work so i'll do best to explain here.

As I see it, the conflicts would be happening as you would've called your server "www". Historically, www was a DNS prefix referring to a service. So, when you typed it in, it would take you to the www service on that server, much the same as ftp would direct you to the ftp server and pop would direct you to the pop3 server... and so on.

On your server you've created the domain fiefdom.com as you state, and you're only using that for mail so you've called the server (assigned the hostname) www. You'll still have virtualhost files for Apache and a www A record. My point here is you have a service running on your server for Apache and it would be accessed via the domain itself, or the www prefix. This is where some confusion for your server or errors could happen as when accessing a server by it's hostname, it's unusual to be accessed under the guise of another service (if that makes sense)

Regarding the TLS cert for the server, I can't stop you calling the server "www" but it's your choice. Yes that cert you have can be used to secure the hostname of www, and the services attached to the hostname, but when you try and access the mailbox via mail.fiefdom.com there won't be a certificate to cover that particular service FQDN as you only have a single domain, not a wildcard or SAN.

In short, a server should be identified by and called something totally different from any domains you host on the server, and other services. If you must use one of your existing domains, give the hostname a unique identifier and FQDN A record.

 

[Richard G]

So I am wondering, if I am using fiefdom to actually host the control panel, where might the apache conflicts be happening?

Wait until you will be using certain redirects on your server, then you will get an issue when trying to reach DA via www.fiefdom.com:2222 and it might also cause some odd mail issues maybe.
It's always a strong advise to not use any preserved names for the hostname, so not www, ftp, mail, smtp, imap or pop.
You can use for example mail-mx.fierdom.com or www2 or whatever, but it's just best to not use records like already present in DA.

Next to that, if you keep a seperate hostname like should be done, then you don't have issues if you for example need to move your domain to a vps but keep the current vps and hostname.

If you use a owned SSL, then it might not work for the hostname if it's not a wildcard certificate.
However, that can be solved by using a seperate DNS entry in DNS administration (see my manual) and then issuing an LE certificate (free) for the hostname.

Ofcourse it's your own choice, but be aware to mention that you did it this way this if you encounter issues in the future.

So I am wondering, if I am using fiefdom to actually host the control panel, where might the apache conflicts be happening?

Wait until you will be using certain redirects on your server, then you will get an issue when trying to reach DA via www.fiefdom.com:2222 and it might also cause some odd mail issues maybe.
It's always a strong advise to not use any preserved names for the hostname, so not www, ftp, mail, smtp, imap or pop.
You can use for example mail-mx.fierdom.com or www2 or whatever, but it's just best to not use records like already present in DA.

Next to that, if you keep a seperate hostname like should be done, then you don't have issues if you for example need to move your domain to a vps but keep the current vps and hostname.

If you use a owned SSL, then it might not work for the hostname if it's not a wildcard certificate.
However, that can be solved by using a seperate DNS entry in DNS administration (see my manual) and then issuing an LE certificate (free) for the hostname.

Does it make more sense to use www as the hostname?
Ofcourse it's your own choice, but be aware to mention that you did it this way this if you encounter issues in the future.
No unless you are sending mails van php mail which works via the hostname. Most scripts can use SMTP to send mail and then it's going via Exim and your domain name is used, not your hostname.
The www is not intended for mail traffic anyway but only for web traffic.

"May I ask? Is this the very same SSL Outlook 2007 is referring to?"
Outlook 2007 is not supported anymore. But you can use SSL via port 465 on smtp and that still works. Also with the free LE certificates. On port 587 you want need to use the automaticl setting or TLS setting.
Unless I don't quite understand your question here.

 

[DrWizzle]

Odd. Can't add a reply here anymore.

I've just reported the issue (to right place I hope) on another post Richard.

 

[Richard G]

Sorry about the mess, I couln't post my complete reply with the 2 extra quotes, it got refused by the forum software.
After removing the quotes it worked. Looks like a quote limit on posts.

 

[DrWizzle]

Sorry about the mess, I couln't post my complete reply with the 2 extra quotes, it got refused by the forum software.
After removing the quotes it worked. Looks like a quote limit on posts.

I can quote, but not large sections (as I tried quoting this post earlier) but can't upload images or attachments either. Probably a forum update that is buggy.

 

[Cordarex]

Hello everyone,
I would like to thank you all for your keen interest and useful tips. Unfortunately, I also found that the installation wizard did not work with regard to the correct data.

With the help of DirectAdmin's documentation and, I admit, AI (ClaudeAI), I was able to help myself.

I now have a fully functional DirectAdmin solution and am happy with it.

Unfortunately, it took me several attempts, but I succeeded.
I also opted for a simple BIND solution on the redundancy server, and when creating new users, especially their domains, I manually update the information on both the DirectAdmin server and the redundancy server. It works very well for me and my project with its dimensions.

Thank you again for the great support, which I really appreciate.

 

[DrWizzle]

Hello everyone,
I would like to thank you all for your keen interest and useful tips. Unfortunately, I also found that the installation wizard did not work with regard to the correct data.

With the help of DirectAdmin's documentation and, I admit, AI (ClaudeAI), I was able to help myself.

I now have a fully functional DirectAdmin solution and am happy with it.

Unfortunately, it took me several attempts, but I succeeded.
I also opted for a simple BIND solution on the redundancy server, and when creating new users, especially their domains, I manually update the information on both the DirectAdmin server and the redundancy server. It works very well for me and my project with its dimensions.

Thank you again for the great support, which I really appreciate.

Glad it's working, just a thought:: Instead of messing about manually updating BIND on your slave DNS, there are a few easier options. You could set it up as a BIND Slave by using a copy of directslave (free) or a personal plus copy of DA ($5 a month) on your slave server and setup multiserver. Literally set and forget.

 

[Cordarex]

Glad it's working, just a thought:: Instead of messing about manually updating BIND on your slave DNS, there are a few easier options. You could set it up as a BIND Slave by using a copy of directslave (free) or a personal plus copy of DA ($5 a month) on your slave server and setup multiserver. Literally set and forget.

You could set it up as a BIND slave using a copy of directslave (free)...
>> I looked into that, but couldn't really get to grips with it.

...or set up a Personal Plus copy of DA ($5 per month) on your slave server and multiserver. Just set it up and forget about it.
>> Oh, that would work too? I hadn't thought of that...

The question now is whether I want to go through all that effort again if it works after all...

I'll take a look at it.

 

[DrWizzle]

You could set it up as a BIND slave using a copy of directslave (free)...
>> I looked into that, but couldn't really get to grips with it.

...or set up a Personal Plus copy of DA ($5 per month) on your slave server and multiserver. Just set it up and forget about it.
>> Oh, that would work too? I hadn't thought of that...

The question now is whether I want to go through all that effort again if it works after all...

I'll take a look at it.

No worries, entirely up to you.

I found with DirectSlave, best OS to install it with was Alma 8 or 9.

Regarding DA, simply install a minimal install on your slave vps. Don't worry about all extra services, just make sure you secure it as you would with a normal server and use a TLS cert. Make sure the hostname (servername) is the FQDN of the nameserver you want to create. Setup multiserver and you can be up and running in about 30 mins or less. Beauty of this way is DA is maintained, and the personal plus you can host unlimited DNS records. DirectSlave isn't updated as much, although guys here will inform if any bugs and fixes pop up. Good luck with it all!