Aaron Goldblatt wrote: > With respect to the remainder of your question, reverse resolution isn't a > necessary consideration. > > For example: > > mail.goldblatt.net -- 208.190.130.82. It reverses to > wndrgrl.goldblatt.net. It still works. This is the case what made me think the subject in the first place: If mail servers MX name (mail.goldblatt.net) which it announces when contacting another mailserver is different than the one that a PTR record for it's IP address 208.190.130.82 resolves (wndrgrl.goldblatt.net) I thought it might lead to trouble. But you are absolutely sure that it won't? If so, great, no problemo then. Peter
- 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
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? q question
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Charles Cazabon
- error with sqwebmail Brendan McAlpine
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? q question
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? James Raftery
- Re: Can MX record be CNAME? Kris von Mach