Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
la, 2006-05-27 kello 16:57 +0100, Simon Kelley kirjoitti:
Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
Package: dnsmasq
Version: 2.31-1
Severity: wishlist
It would be desirable for dnsmasq to also set the A record for the mail
exchange,
to accomodate MTU that are not capable of polling the nameserver for MX records.
It will do that for A records defined locally: ie MX record in
/etc/dnsmasq.conf and corresponding A record in /etc/hosts.
Doing it that way, MX record can be an FQDN target at the ISP as defined
in dsnmasq.conf (which leaves room open for the ISP to change the IP of
their SMTP host), but A record ends up statically defined in /etc/hosts
(which forces the dnsmasq user to hack /etc/hosts every time their ISP
changes its mind about the IP for their mail server).
What we need is a way to avoid statically linking an IP to the mail
server's A record and to map it dynamically just like the MX answer.
I understand: but doing that in dnsmasq is really hard: (there's
basically no way to create a DNS reply which has some local information
and some from upstream, without completely re-writing the program, and
losing the small footprint.
Have you actually found an MTA which doesn't do a second A record DNS
lookup when it gets an MX record without an additional section?
I can't quickly find an authoritative reference, but I think the absence
of additional section records should not be taken as evidence of absence
of records in the DNS. Addition sections are a performance hack to
eliminate redundant queries, not authoritative answers.
Cheers,
Simon.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
