On Thu, 25 Apr 2024, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via mailop wrote:
I would personally prefer if the MX records started being explicitly required
- so we don't expect all host with A/AAAA records to accept/send mail and
don't need to mark them with Null MX to say "no we don't"
but changing this is for long run.
Smile:
https://list.mailop.org/private/mailop/2012-October/003782.html
Me> Without going that far, is there any chance of getting a convention
Me> that you send to if a domain does not have an MX record you try
Me> any A record address(es) but not any AAAA record addresses ?
TonyFinch> Too late for that by about 10 years, I'm afraid.
Looks like that dream is getting further away :-(
We wont will that fight if we don't push for it.
On 25.04.24 14:59, Andrew C Aitchison via mailop wrote:
Should someone here not know, RFC 7505
A "Null MX" No Service Resource Record for Domains That Accept No Mail
is the accepted standard way to signal a domain that does not receive
email.
This is not a null MX. Null MX doex explicitly exist and points to ".".
invoices.premierinn.de has no A, AAAA or MX records.
null MX would look like:
invoices.premierinn.de. 1800 IN MX 0 .
The domainonly has SPF record which is a bit strange, but from the mail point
of view it does not exist.
invoices.premierinn.de. 1800 IN TXT "v=spf1
include:oracleindustry.com ~all"
So, there is no reason to accept mail from/to invoices.premierinn.de.
By using the MX records suggested there, a recipient would know
that the sender acknowledges sending mail from that domain.
It's the opposite. Null MX is designed to know a host does not send/receive
mail, so you don't accept mail from/to such host.
You are right. I should not have suggested a NULL MX record for this.
--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
and...@aitchison.me.uk
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
