From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Sep  5 21:37:19 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA20900
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 5 Sep 1997 21:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA20894
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 5 Sep 1997 21:37:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA11495; Fri, 5 Sep 1997 22:37:01 -0600 (MDT)
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 22:37:01 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <199709060437.WAA11495@rocky.mt.sri.com>
From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: A quick note to those without DNS resolvable mail hosts. 
In-Reply-To: <16461.873520528@time.cdrom.com>
References: <199709060434.WAA11474@rocky.mt.sri.com>
	<16461.873520528@time.cdrom.com>
X-Mailer: VM 6.29 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > Quick question.  If I have a valid 'MX' record, is that good enough?  My
> 
> Sure, I can't imagine why it wouldn't be - sendmail is going to
> look up the MX record first, so even if there's no A record it
> shouldn't be an issue.

Good enough for me.  I just wanted to make sure the 'spam' rules didn't
supercede this very common configuration. :)


Nate