[Top] [All Lists]

Re: MX to CNAME and (mis)interpretation of 2821

2008-02-24 11:11:25

At 05:44 24-02-2008, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
The situation is cumbersome, since rfc1035 says nothing on MX semantics, referring to rfc974. Indeed, the algorithm is explained in rfc974, but it is "Obsoleted by: 2821", the SMTP being updated. However, rfc2181 updates rfc1035 and has a section 10.3 "MX and NS records" where it says

 The domain name used as the value of a NS resource record, or part of
 the value of a MX resource record must not be an alias.  Not only is
 the specification clear on this point, but using an alias in either
 of these positions neither works as well as might be hoped, nor well
 fulfills the ambition that may have led to this approach.  This
 domain name must have as its value one or more address records.

Thus, it seems it is up to rfc2821bis to be "clear on this point."

See for the clarification.