-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
William Leibzon wrote:
Julian Mehnle wrote:
Where is this being verboten? I only use MX->CNAME (or MX->CNAME->
CNAME) because I believe it is technically valid. I would not be using
it if I believed it was verboten, so I'd really like to know.
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1912.html
"Don't use CNAMEs in combination with RRs which point to other names
like MX, CNAME, PTR and NS. [...]"
I mentioned before why I think RFC 1912 cannot be considered conclusive in
this regard, but I'll repeat it:
$ dig mehnle.net TXT +sho | grep CNAME
"MX->CNAME is by intention. Go read
<http://www.mengwong.com/misc/rfc1912-is-wrong.html>."
In summary, neither RFC 1912 nor any of the referenced RFCs say that
MX->CNAME "SHOULD NOT" or "MUST NOT" be used.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCpJL1wL7PKlBZWjsRAq7oAKCTKtc3mRMVQh61Tf9gkThhPsyjMwCfcu6z
PPYvf7k0dNBiMtX6v9qnFJk=
=cm+l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----