> Sam Varshavchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > MX records contain hostnames, not IP addresses. Normal processing of MX
> > records will result in the malformed MX record getting ignored (since
> > the A lookup on the hostname will fail).
> >
> > So, with none the wiser, the MX record will be ignored. This may not be
> > noticable right away, and everyone will carry on, forging ahead for some
> > time, before anyone realizes that this MX ain't getting much mail.
> >
> > This is a special-case testing for a common misconfiguration, and
> > explicitly rejecting it in a visible way, so that it may be fixed.
>
> I think the question is:
>
> Why does it *need* to be fixed in the first place, except for the reason
> that it's not RFC compliant?
>
Good question. It just adds to my administrative burden. Also, in my
current case, the sending MX records look like this:
MX 8 n.n.n.n.
MX 10 mail.foobar.com.
So one of the MX records is valid, but courier still rejects all mail from
this domain. Don't I look silly when I call their IT department and try to
get them to fix it!
Carey
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g.
Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click
_______________________________________________
courier-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
