Quoth Giuliano Gavazzi on Fri, Feb 07, 2003: > let me take my argument further: if you have an MX you are clearly
> stating that the mail for domain foo is dealt with by host foomx
> (your example is misguiding, using foo twice).
No, it's not misguiding, because this was exactly the situation I
was talking about.
> There might not exist
> an host foo at all. While if you only have an A record for foo and no
> MX at all, you are saying that mail for host foo is dealt by foo
> itself. Host foo exists necessarily in this case.
We seem to agree here.
> At 4:18 +0200 2003/02/07, Vadim Vygonets wrote:
> >Quoth Greg A. Woods on Thu, Feb 06, 2003:
> [...]
> > > "Ya know.... " there's a reason why people use unique names with
> >> prefixes like "mail" and "www" for different services... :-)
> >
> >Hmm, no, I don't really see one, except convenience. Also, 'ftp'
> >and 'www' are often CNAME records.
>
> because one day you might want to split those services amongst
> distinct hosts (to spread the load/rationalise the organisation), but
> you've got everyone used to a single name and you are stuck!
As I said, convenience. In any case, I have no idea why Greg
brought this point up, which confused me somewhat.
