Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt(_at_)gulbrandsen(_dot_)priv(_dot_)no> wrote:
but I’d like to hear your opinion on the issue.
MX -> CNAME is not allowed according to the RFCs but sensible
implementations support it in the obvious way. There was a massive
flamewar on this topic during the work on RFC 5321 leading to some
awkward verbiage in section 5.1:
Any other response, specifically including a value that will return a
CNAME record when queried, lies outside the scope of this Standard.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/ - I xn--zr8h
punycode
Southeast Biscay: Variable 3 or 4. Slight or moderate. Mainly fair. Good.
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp