On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:27:43AM -0500, Frank Cusack wrote:
> After searching the mailing list (and the web in general) what I
> can gather about multiple PTR records is that postfix is adamant
> that hosts should not have multiple PTR records.
>
> Who cares? It's like saying DNS names should not have underscores
> or spaces.
Indeed, the DNS standards allow PTR records to coexist with other
PTRs and other RR types. If you're delegated some in-addr.arpa.
zones, you can in fact put any and all RR types in them. What the
resolver clients may or may not do with those records is another
issue altogether.
Furthermore, you're not even limited to the naming of your records.
If you have 2.0.192.in-addr.arpa., you can have records with any
legal name: rob0.2.0.192.in-addr.arpa. wacky.2.0.192.in-addr.arpa.,
whatever strikes your fancy, and $INCLUDE above re: resolvers.
> Yes we don't like it, but it's easy for postfix to accept and deal
> with it. OTOH, it's difficult to get OTHER admins to fix their
> configuration and additionally it doesn't actually create a problem
> that I can see.
>
> I'll post my actual problem in another thread, to keep this one
> focused on the policy around multiple PTR records.
I don't understand. Are you asking a question about how Postfix
handles the case when multiple PTRs are found for a single IP
address? That was discussed here fairly recently. Or are you
advocating a change in how this case should be handled?
It's hard to focus on what you said when we don't know what you
said. :)
--
Offlist mail to this address is discarded unless
"/dev/rob0" or "not-spam" is in Subject: header
