In <20030306120607(_dot_)6562af5d(_dot_)moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>
Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
Why are reverse MX records or domain specific DNSBLs any harder to
maintain that regular MX records?
it depends on how often the data changes. most MX records are fairly
static. DNSBLs are centrally managed, which is different.
Domain specific DNSBLs are maintained in the same zone file as the MX
records for a domain. When you add an incoming mail server, you have
to add the MX record. When you add an outgoing mail server, you have
to add either an RMX record or a CNAME.
Considering the volume on this list, I can hardly blame anyone for
missing this message, especially because it was only the third message
posted, but the domain specific DNSBL was mentioned here:
https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg00002.html
This mostly just contains a reference to:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=vixie+mx+records+spam&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=3E18B0B3.43939A35%40Andrzej.Adam.Filip&rnum=10
-wayne
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg