[TAG] A couple of questions regarding Mail policy
Jay R. Ashworth
jra at baylink.com
Wed Jun 23 02:53:20 MSD 2004
On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 03:28:10PM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Jay R. Ashworth (jra at baylink.com):
> > On reflection, I misremembered. The situation *I* banged into was
> > whether machines must have MX records *in addition* to their A records
> > in order to be valid targets for mail; *this* is the situation over
> > which there is apparently controversy.
> Ah yes. I remember that one.
> Objecting to hosts receiving mail at their "A" addresses absent an MX
> record is, I suppose, defensible -- if you're seriously
> obsessive-compulsive about Thou Shall Observe the Letter of the RFCs and
> Nothing But. ;->
I believe I implied that it might have been djb. I think that's wrong;
I think it was a whackadoo on NANOG. One of the ORSC-related people,
alas; possibly Sexton. I am going to have to go find out now.
> Everyone else considers such a host to have an
> implied MX record with priority level zero. Fortunately, I'm pretty
> sure all MTA authors assume that, even Prof. Bernstein.
Doesn't 2821 or 2 explicitly say it these days?
> > Clearly. He was wondering, I think, how many irrational anti-spammers
> > were out there, clearly a non-empty set.
> Oh yeah.
Jay R. Ashworth jra at baylink.com
Designer Baylink RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274
2004 Stanley Cup Champion Tampa Bay Lightning
More information about the TAG