DNS recommendations - the paper
- Previous message (by thread): DNS recommendations - the paper
- Next message (by thread): DNS recommendations - the paper
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Michael Hallgren
hallgren at fdn.org
Wed Nov 25 22:06:58 CET 1998
On Wed, Nov 25, 1998 at 02:36:18AM -0800, Randy Bush wrote: > >> the point is that, if X runs an SMTP server, then there is no need for an > >> MX for X. > > There is a need if you want to provide failsafe SMTP service. > > nope. all you have done is shuffle it to another non-destination spool. > > let's stick to the standards, not religion/fantasy. Yes, 'cause hackin' up a workable solution \neq standards. We have to fight ourselves out of patching. Maybe I'm a bit of a fascist, maybe not, but we have to consider scalability and production. I exchanged a bit of mail (with Randy and other's yesterday night), convincing me of the one way rfc approach... after all, it's not a nightmare to get put a zone in operation... but to stay clean is a valuable effort. BTW, looked into the M$soft implementaion... virgin experience... to be ctd;-) One (important) gain running the rfc way is KISS :-) Michael > > randy > -- Michael Hallgren, http://mh.graphnet.fr
- Previous message (by thread): DNS recommendations - the paper
- Next message (by thread): DNS recommendations - the paper
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]