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?
Because it's not RFC compliant, it is not going to work. It's not a valid MX record. The resolver takes the hostname from the MX record, and attempts to do an A address lookup on that hostname. This will fail until such time that top-level numerical domains actually exist.
Rather than burying everyone's head in a pile of sand, and hoping that the problem will go away by itself, somebody needs to fix it.
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
