On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, CLEMENT Francis wrote: > I don't understand your response, Davide, as Rob pointed out the fact = > that > xmail tried to connect to > Server: <www.optusnet.com.au> [211.29.132.105] > And you response used :=20 > Server: <mail.optusnet.com.au> [211.29.132.250]
That means that 1.25-pre06 looked up the MX just fine here. > So, even if the final user doesn't exist, it's not the real problem > mentionned/reported by Rob :) > The question seems to be (correct me, Rob, if not correct) : > > Why xmail used/choosed/got/tried/... WWW.optusnet.com.au on Rob server = > and > not MAIL.optusnet.com.au the effectively declared MX for optusnet.com, = > as > your server ? > And Rob digs seemed to proove that there is no 'dns' problem from its = > server > as a mx search return effectively MAIL.optusnet.com as the MX !?!? > Rfc seems to say (if I interpreted them correctly) : IF at least one mx > entry is found user ONLY the mx list, even if all/some busy, = > unreachable, > (next retries must continue to use the MX entries, and never fallback = > to A > records....). A records usage "could" be used only as an alternative = > "auto > mx" when NO mx entries exist. XMail either gets an MX or it tries the A record, that is *exactly* the domain name. That was WWW.domainname, and the *only* way it could have got there, is as a MX. Strange thing is, that host does not appear anywhere in the DNS packets at the moment. A temporary screw up on their DNS? - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
