spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: the "implicit-MX" rule and a proposed BCP

2004-02-14 07:37:21
On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 02:26:23PM +0000, Shevek wrote:

- The resulting addresses MUST have PTR records, and these PTR records
  MUST match the host.  The following lookups will still work but are
  discouraged:
  somehost -> a.b.c.d; a.b.c.d -> otherhost; otherhost -> a.b.c.d

This is absolutely standard setup for many places. domain.com => a.b.c.d 
=> mailhost.comain.com => a.b.c.d. This happens because domain.com might 
be needed as a www or telnet server, and this might be on a separate 
system to the MX. I've always considered it peculiar that DNS specified 
what is effectively a TCP redirect for port 25, but it does, and that's 
how it's used.

$origin example.tld
@           MX   0 mailhost.example.tld.
mailhost    A    a.b.c.d

d.c.b.a.in-addr.arpa PTR mailhost.example.tld.

I don't see why an www or telnet server would clash with above setup.
Please explain.

I am saying something about the following (at least I tried to do so):

$origin domain.com
@           MX   0 mailhost.example.tld.
mailhost    A    a.b.c.d
crypticname A    a.b.c.d

d.c.b.a.in-addr.arpa PTR crypticname.example.tld.

  The following will NOT result in a valid lookup:
  somehost -> a.b.c.d; a.b.c.d -> otherhost; otherhost -> p.q.r.s

These last conditions are naturally required of any DNS-based lookup.

Plenty of domains seem to get it wrong.  Leave out the A record for
crypticname in my 2nd example above, and you get something that's seen
in the wild.

cheers,
Alex
-- 
begin  sig
http://www.googlism.com/index.htm?ism=alex+van+den+bogaerdt&type=1
This message was produced without any <iframe tags