On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 02:58:30PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> By author: Gerhard Mack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > Thanklfully bind 9 barfs if you even try this sort of thing.
> >
>
> Personally I find it puzzling what's wrong with MX -> CNAME at all; it
> seems like a useful setup without the pitfalls that either NS -> CNAME
> or CNAME -> CNAME can cause (NS -> CNAME can trivially result in
> irreducible situations; CNAME -> CNAME would require a link maximum
> count which could result in obscure breakage.)
>
> -hpa
There's not really something wrong with MX's pointing to CNAME's. It's just that some
mailservers could (can?) not handle this. So if you want to be able to receive mail
from all kinds of mailservers, don't use CNAME's for MX's.
Regards
Jan Gyselinck
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
