9 Jun
2011
9 Jun
'11
9:45 a.m.
Hi,
That's something that irritates me
no end. Why force everyone to
put the spurious "www." on the address? It's no harder to handle a
configuration with and without the www.
Having an DNS records at your NS delegation point is fraught with
technicalities. For example, you can't (easily) put a CNAME there. If
you put an A record there then you have to be able to accept inbound
mail at that machine even if it's supposed to be your "web" server. MX
isn't the only way of controlling mail: it's a relatively "new" thing
as
far as mail is concerned and it's still allowed to deliver mail to host
specified by and A record.
It's possible to make it work but it's difficult to get exactly right
and some purists believe it to be a point of policy to disallow it.
I am told that you should be able to get away with this provided that
you get your port 25 firewall correct on your webserver. Set it to
"reject" so that things fail quickly.
Daniel: good point about "implicit MX". Thanks.
Regards,
@ndy
--
andyjpb(a)ashurst.eu.org
http://www.ashurst.eu.org/
0x7EBA75FF
On Wed, Jun
08, 2011 at 06:52:43PM +0000, ed wrote:
> Plus.net who in the past didn't seem that eager to get involved
> were making some big efforts to get people connected.
"dig plus.net aaaa +short" is not returning anything :-(
dig
www.plus.net aaaa +short does though :-)