On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 04:39:32PM -0400, Kris von Mach wrote: > At 11:09 AM 5/3/2001 -0700, you wrote: > >This means that pointing MX, NS, and SOA (at least) at a CNAME is not > >recommended. Personally, I hate CNAME, and I almost never use it. I can > >think of only one specialized use where CNAME comes in handy > >(third-party hosting). Nearly everything else can be done more > >efficiently with multiple A records IMHO. > > So, having multiple A records pointing to the same IP is ok then, when it > comes to MX? Yes. > Or should MX mail.swishmail.com point to an IP address that nothing else > points to? like for example: Not necessary. Greetz, Peter.
- Can MX record be CNAME? Peter Peltonen
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Charles Cazabon
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Markus Stumpf
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Kris von Mach
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Charles Cazabon
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Greg White
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Kris von Mach
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Charles Cazabon
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Peter van Dijk
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Timothy Mayo
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Aaron Goldblatt
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Tim Legant
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Markus Stumpf
- REMOVE test test
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Peter Peltonen
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Markus Stumpf
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Peter Peltonen
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Peter van Dijk
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Scott D. Yelich