Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > ma, 2006-05-29 kello 10:21 +0100, Simon Kelley kirjoitti: > >>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. > > > Hmm... What if it were able to assign the A record to the target's IP? > That is, we currently have: > > mail.intranet,mail.isp.com,50 > > We could give an A record reply that is the ISP's mail server IP. We > would end up with: > > MX: mail.intranet, which is an alias for mail.isp.com with priority 50. > A: mail.intranet, whose IP is the same as the one for mail.isp.com. > > Not quite kosher, I know, but it would achieve the desired result.
If I've understood you suggestion correctly, you could do that just by putting the mail.isp.com A record in /etc/hosts. dnsmasq would then supply the A record in the additional section. If that's a solution, then I'll probably tag this "wontfix". As a explained before, the complete solution is not practical. > > >>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? > > > ssmtp (debian package of the same name) knows nothing about MX record. > Ah, OK. Cheers, Simon. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
