Mark Andrews <marka(_at_)isc(_dot_)org> writes:
Russ Allbery writes:
That they've added an MX rcord doesn't mean that they don't understand
the problems, or that they even expect to receive mail there. It's the
kind of thing that, were I in the position to do, I probably would do
just for the hell of it, and because it's a sort of SMTP party trick.
It doesn't hurt anything to have the MX record. Given how mail is
processed, it will mostly just be ignored.
But it does hurt as it gives people that don't know any better a
expectation that it will work.
Does anyone who doesn't know better even know that these MX records exist?
The only reason why I knew about them were from similar threads in mailing
lists like this among people who do indeed know how mail works. I've
never seen them advertised to users broadly, or used in published email
addresses.
A lot of this debate is a direct result of tld administrators playing
silly games by adding MX records.
I think the debate is just because it's a weird corner case, and this
group isn't particularly active with important business these days but is
still full of people who like talking about the details of mail
implementation, particularly weird corner cases. In other words, it's
more general entertainment than anything that has much practical impact on
the day-to-day functioning of Internet mail.
--
Russ Allbery (rra(_at_)stanford(_dot_)edu)
<http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp