Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Re

On Jul 19, 2014, at 1:59 AM, Viktor Dukhovni 
<ietf-dane(_at_)dukhovni(_dot_)org> wrote:

Sorry, no, that would be "dig mx www.ietf.org":


You misunderstand.   I was suggesting that the MX record for ietf.org be used 
as a template for other non-mail-receiving subdomains of ietf.org.

(To avoid further controversy, though, the responses I've gotten on this topic 
have been generally helpful, and I am not asserting that this should be done 
instead of what has been proposed.   I was merely floating it to see what the 
objection would be, and the response was informative.)

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, (continued) Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, John R Levine Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Tony Finch Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Tony Finch Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Tony Finch Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf Re: summary for Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A Null MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Viktor Dukhovni Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Viktor Dukhovni Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Ted Lemon <= Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Douglas Otis Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, S Moonesamy Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, John R Levine Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Scott Kitterman Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Dave Crocker Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Ted Lemon Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Ted Lemon Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Dave Crocker Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Ted Lemon Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard, Hector Santos

Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx-05.txt> (A NULL MX Resource Record for Domains that Accept No Mail) to Proposed Standard