On 29.10.10 12:49, Mark Andrews wrote:
And they can do a SMTP level rejection rather than waiting for the
sending server to abandon sending the email due to multiple timeouts.
Just return 550 for all mail directed to users at those hosts. It
would be nice if we could standardise a MX target
In message 20101112135657.gb22...@fantomas.sk, Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes:
On 29.10.10 12:49, Mark Andrews wrote:
And they can do a SMTP level rejection rather than waiting for the
sending server to abandon sending the email due to multiple timeouts.
Just return 550 for all mail
In message 20101112135657.gb22...@fantomas.sk, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
writes:
On 29.10.10 12:49, Mark Andrews wrote:
And they can do a SMTP level rejection rather than waiting for the
sending server to abandon sending the email due to multiple timeouts.
Just return 550 for all mail
In message 20101112143542.ga23...@fantomas.sk, Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes:
In message 20101112135657.gb22...@fantomas.sk, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wri
tes:
On 29.10.10 12:49, Mark Andrews wrote:
And they can do a SMTP level rejection rather than waiting for the
sending server to
In message 458977.96237...@web53606.mail.re2.yahoo.com, Fr34k writes:
In message barmar-ed15c5.21262028102...@news.eternal-september.org, Barr
y
Mar
golin writes:
In article mailman.585.1288263412.555.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote:
On Thu, 28
I'd like to suggest an alternative reason for the presence of those records:
The Perl script H2N will install them by default for every single host in
the zone file, unless you use the -M option to suppress their creation.
Obviously this has nothing to do with the value, or lack thereof, of those
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Mark Andrews wrote:
It would be nice if we could standardise a MX target of . as saying
that this domain doesn't accept email e.g. MX 0 . the same way as SRV
0 0 0 . means that there is no service for the named protocol. That
way the sending MTA or the MSA can reject the
On 28/10/10 11:56, Tony Finch wrote:
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Gregory Machin wrote:
My question is why would INMX10mcvpemr01 and INMX
10mcvpemr02 be repeated trough the zone file surely this is
redundant ?
Some hostmasters like to ensure that mail is not directed to hosts
In article mailman.585.1288263412.555.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote:
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Gregory Machin wrote:
My question is why would INMX10mcvpemr01 and INMX
10mcvpemr02 be repeated trough the zone file surely this is
redundant ?
In message barmar-ed15c5.21262028102...@news.eternal-september.org, Barry Mar
golin writes:
In article mailman.585.1288263412.555.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote:
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Gregory Machin wrote:
My question is why would INMX10mcvpemr01
- Original Message
From: Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org
To: Barry Margolin bar...@alum.mit.edu
Cc: comp-protocols-dns-b...@isc.org
Sent: Thu, October 28, 2010 9:49:46 PM
Subject: Re: out of place mx records.
In message barmar-ed15c5.21262028102...@news.eternal-september.org
Hello Gregory,
Thu, 28 Oct 2010 13:04:58 +1300 Gregory Machin wrote:
Hi.
I have taken over some dns servers, and the process of doing upgrade,
half way through the process..
I have a question about the zone files , as there is some
configuration here that I have not seen before and seems
Hi Gregory,
mail02 IN A 192.168.xx.xx
IN MX 10 mcvpemr01
IN MX 10 mcvpemr02
nelson IN A 202.xx.xx.1
IN MX 10 mcvpemr01
IN MX 10
To me it looks redundant, named-compilezone -o - zone file should show
you how bind interprets these.
My guess is that they will be listed only once in the output.
I don't see how they could belong to each subdomain, to do that there
should be a@... to set a new origin?
On 28/10/10 2:14, Ian
Hello Sten,
Thu, 28 Oct 2010 02:48:36 +0200 Sten Carlsen wrote:
To me it looks redundant, named-compilezone -o - zone file should
show you how bind interprets these.
My guess is that they will be listed only once in the output.
I don't see how they could belong to each subdomain, to do
They prevent people who start a potentially rogue mailserver to receive mails.
I.e. You centralize mails and make sure only your authorized mailserver
receives them when you dont have full control over these boxes.
-mat
On Oct 28, 2010, at 8:48 AM, Sten Carlsen st...@s-carlsen.dk wrote:
To
In article mailman.575.1288226936.555.bind-us...@lists.isc.org,
Sten Carlsen st...@s-carlsen.dk wrote:
To me it looks redundant, named-compilezone -o - zone file should show
you how bind interprets these.
My guess is that they will be listed only once in the output.
I suggest you try it, and
Hello Gregory,
Thu, 28 Oct 2010 15:54:32 +1300 Gregory Machin wrote:
Hi Andrey.
Thanks for you input.
OK .. but most of those hosts should not be accepting email
connections, buy my understanding. Or is it implied that email
destined for that host would be handled by the email servers
18 matches
Mail list logo
