David Brodbeck wrote on Friday, March 11, 2005 7:47 AM:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Bowyer [mailto:peeebeee@gmail.com]
>
>> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:12:25 -0500, David Brodbeck
>> <DavidB@???> wrote:
>>> Is this set of records legal? My ISP claims it will break
>>> something if they implement it:
>>>
>>> mail.interclean.com. MX 30 mail.interclean.com.
>>> mail.interclean.com. A 152.160.178.33
>>>
>>> I realize it should be *unnecessary*, but will it work?
>>
>> It's not invalid. But what do you intend it to achieve? Can't say
>> whether it will 'work' until you define 'work'.
>
> Good point. Here's the story. I already have an MX record for
> interclean.com, but before I started working here there wasn't one,
> and a lot of our business cards still show addresses ending in
> @mail.interclean.com. We recently ran into trouble with a customer
> whose mail system refuses to fall back to the A record when the MX
> record isn't present.
>
> I actually told the ISP to go ahead with it and I'd have them back it
> out again if it broke anything. It solved the original problem, but
> I figured I'd better ask in case there was something subtly wrong
> with this that I wasn't spotting.
Then yes, it acheives the desired outcome and is not invalid. Although
personally I would tell the other party to fix their cruddy non-RFC
compliant email system, I guess if they are a (presumably paying)
customer your options are limited.
-Steve
--
Steve Luzynski, CISSP, RHCE
Aquila, Inc.
