Hi,
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 15:16, Jason Pyeronjpye...@pdinc.us wrote:
Now we want to just override the MX records for pdinc.us without having to
merge
or manage all the records for every entry/subdoamin in the zone file for
pdinc.us.
Why don't you just set the MX records of pdinc.us to
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Filipe Brandenburger
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 10:10
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 15:16, Jason Pyeronjpye
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:27, Jason Pyeronjpye...@pdinc.us wrote:
My worry is the A record for the outsourced mail service is out of our
control,
if it were to change it would be catastrophic.
Well, if you *must* use a name like mx.google.com for your MX, you
could also set up an
Filipe Brandenburger wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:27, Jason Pyeronjpye...@pdinc.us wrote:
My worry is the A record for the outsourced mail service is out of our
control,
if it were to change it would be catastrophic.
Well, if you *must* use a name like mx.google.com for your MX, you
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Filipe Brandenburger
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 10:40
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:27, Jason Pyeronjpye
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Les Mikesell
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 11:49
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Filipe Brandenburger wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:27
Jason Pyeron wrote:
Personally, I don't like to rely on features that are
vendor-specific like that but it might be a quick fix for
this problem. The real solution would be to configure your
sending sendmails to use a MAIL_HUB setting - at least any
Not all of the systems can be
Jason Pyeron wrote:
I like the idea about the cname. Can a cname be used as a host for a MX
record?
CNAME's can only be used for things that only have an A record. for
example, you can't use a CNAME for a domain, which needs a SOA, A, NS,
MX record.
in general, CNAME's should be
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Les Mikesell
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:28
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Jason Pyeron wrote:
Personally, I don't like to rely
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:34
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Jason Pyeron wrote:
I like the idea about the cname. Can
Jason Pyeron wrote:
I'd expect the most common case to be mail user agents that
have to be specifically configured for the forwarding smtp
server anyway.
In fact most are default configurations. An engineer will up an (vm) image,
give
it some tasks to do (temp website, software
Jason Pyeron wrote:
CNAME's can only be used for things that only have an A record. for
example, you can't use a CNAME for a domain, which needs a SOA, A, NS, MX
record.
Not sure if you are ACKing or NAKing?
Pdinc.us mx 1 smtprelay.pdinc.us
Smtprelay.pdinc.us cname
On Monday 03 August 2009 00:36, Les Mikesell wrote:
Drew wrote:
It's a bit of bad form to use NAT and private addresses at all because
the internet really wasn't designed to be segmented, but everyone does
it.
Why is NAT bad form?
I don't mean to imply it shouldn't be used -
We have internal DNS servers that will override the A record for selected hosts.
Example mail.pdinc.us will have a different internal ip than external. This has
always been a fine way to handle it as the zone files are for that specific
host, and there have never been subdomains before.
Now we
On Sun, Aug 02, 2009, Jason Pyeron wrote:
We have internal DNS servers that will override the A record for selected
hosts.
Example mail.pdinc.us will have a different internal ip than external. This has
always been a fine way to handle it as the zone files are for that specific
host, and there
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Bill Campbell
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 15:20
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
On Sun, Aug 02, 2009, Jason Pyeron wrote:
We have internal DNS
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Jason Pyeron
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 15:52
To: 'CentOS mailing list'
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun
Am Sonntag, den 02.08.2009, 21:16 +0200 schrieb Jason Pyeron:
We have internal DNS servers that will override the A record for selected
hosts.
Example mail.pdinc.us will have a different internal ip than external. This
has
always been a fine way to handle it as the zone files are for that
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Christoph Maser
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 16:02
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Am Sonntag, den 02.08.2009, 21:16 +0200 schrieb Jason Pyeron
Christoph Maser wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 02.08.2009, 21:16 +0200 schrieb Jason Pyeron:
We have internal DNS servers that will override the A record for selected
hosts.
Example mail.pdinc.us will have a different internal ip than external. This
has
always been a fine way to handle it as the
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Les Mikesell
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 16:21
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Christoph Maser wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 02.08.2009, 21:16 +0200
Jason Pyeron wrote:
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Les Mikesell
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 16:21
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Christoph Maser wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 02.08.2009
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Les Mikesell
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 17:38
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Jason Pyeron wrote:
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun
Jason Pyeron wrote:
You could just firewall port 25 on the spam-checking MX
They are outsourced to google, we cannot control that.
You must have a firewall that you control on your side where these connections
have to pass.
relays from the trusted networks and add a high-numbered MX
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org
[mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Les Mikesell
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 18:20
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Split dns issues
Jason Pyeron wrote:
You could just firewall port 25
It's a bit of bad form to use NAT and private addresses at all because the
internet really wasn't designed to be segmented, but everyone does it.
Why is NAT bad form?
From my standpoint as an admin, private IP's NAT are another tool to
help secure my network. You can't attack what you can't
26 matches
Mail list logo
