Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 09:08:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Jim Shankland <jas@flyingfox.com> To: greg@safetyweb.com.au, root@internet.dk Cc: isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: MX CNAME Message-ID: <199807231608.JAA12107@biggusdiskus.flyingfox.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980723175056.03c3ed00@bach>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I also wonder what is the rationale behind the "no MX to a CNAME" rule.
It seems useful ("mailhost" can be a CNAME to the physical machine that
is hosting mail), and not harmful; except, of course, that it's illegal,
so we don't do it.
Another alternative, besides the ones that have already been mentioned,
is to do the indirection at the IP address level, rather than at the
DNS level. Since modern OS's like FreeBSD allow you to associate
additional IP addresses with a machine, you can always dedicate an
IP address to "mailhost" (which lets you use an A record for mailhost),
then bind it as an additional IP address to whichever host you want
to instantiate mail services on.
Jim Shankland
Flying Fox Computer Systems, Inc.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199807231608.JAA12107>