Re: [Exim] sender_verify, lookuphost MX and A records

On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Greg A. Woods wrote:

> [ On Tuesday, November 7, 2000 at 11:10:56 (-0500), Dave C. wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: [Exim] sender_verify, lookuphost MX and A records
> >
> > Personally, I would love to mandate MX records for all mail.
> > Unfortunately, the Internet is way past any possibility of
> > realistically expecting such full RFC compliance (on that and any
> > number of more important matters as well), so I permit MX or A records
> > for remote domains.
>
> I look at it the other way around: Despite nearly 20 years of cajoling
> and other pressure tacticts there are still some sticks in the mud who
> will not be budged even though their soon going to rot off in the middle!

I don't really consider that people are refusing, just that they are
ignorant, and there really is no officla way to tell 'everybody' to
require MX records. Too many software developers dont read the RFC's,
or misinterpret them. Too many nonqualified persons get shoved into
sysadmin and dont have a clue, and set it up wrongly..

Unfortunately, there are more of 'them' then there are of 'us'. And its
hard enough as an ISP explaining to a customer that they can't mail to
a domain that has an IP address in its MX target, which is a fairly
infrequent occasion. It would be quite infeasible to try and explain to
a huge pile of customers why all of a sudden they can't mail certain
domains becuase we now require MX records.

> None of them can send me e-mail, and I don't find that a big loss. Some
> of them do still run some pretty big and important domains though so one
> can't quite yet do away with them at any ISP site.

Ah ok, I didnt read that part the first time. As an ISP, we can't be
strict on this one.

> Someday maybe RFC 974 will be deprecated.
>
>

--