Re: out of place mx records.

2010-12-03 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
> In message <20101112143542.ga23...@fantomas.sk>, Matus UHLAR - fantomas > writes: > > what about check-mx setting, can it be also affected by this setting? On 13.11.10 10:56, Mark Andrews wrote: > As I said it is a easy fix. This just copies what the srv check does. shall this be included in

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-11-12 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <20101112143542.ga23...@fantomas.sk>, Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes: > > In message <20101112135657.gb22...@fantomas.sk>, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wri > tes: > > > On 29.10.10 12:49, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > > And they can do a SMTP level rejection rather than waiting for the > > > > sen

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-11-12 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
> In message <20101112135657.gb22...@fantomas.sk>, Matus UHLAR - fantomas > writes: > > On 29.10.10 12:49, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > And they can do a SMTP level rejection rather than waiting for the > > > sending server to abandon sending the email due to multiple timeouts. > > > Just return 550

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-11-12 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <20101112135657.gb22...@fantomas.sk>, Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes: > On 29.10.10 12:49, Mark Andrews wrote: > > And they can do a SMTP level rejection rather than waiting for the > > sending server to abandon sending the email due to multiple timeouts. > > Just return 550 for all mail

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-11-12 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas
On 29.10.10 12:49, Mark Andrews wrote: > And they can do a SMTP level rejection rather than waiting for the > sending server to abandon sending the email due to multiple timeouts. > Just return 550 for all mail directed to users at those hosts. It > would be nice if we could standardise a MX targ

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-29 Thread Tony Finch
On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Mark Andrews wrote: > > It would be nice if we could standardise a MX target of "." as saying > that this domain doesn't accept email e.g. "MX 0 ." the same way as "SRV > 0 0 0 ." means that there is no service for the named protocol. That > way the sending MTA or the MSA can

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-29 Thread Tony Finch
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Fr34k wrote: > > Why not use " IN MX 100 localhost" so the email doesn't even leave the source? That will usually lead to delays, just like having no MX at all. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finchhttp://dotat.at/ HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH BACKING WEST OR NORTHWEST

RE: out of place mx records.

2010-10-29 Thread Mike Bernhardt
I'd like to suggest an alternative reason for the presence of those records: The Perl script H2N will install them by default for every single host in the zone file, unless you use the -M option to suppress their creation. Obviously this has nothing to do with the value, or lack thereof, of those

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-28 Thread Mark Andrews
In message <458977.96237...@web53606.mail.re2.yahoo.com>, Fr34k writes: > > In message , Barr > y > >Mar > > golin writes: > > > In article , > > > Tony Finch wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Gregory Machin wrote: > > > > > > > > > > My question is why would "INMX10 mc

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-28 Thread Fr34k
- Original Message > From: Mark Andrews > To: Barry Margolin > Cc: comp-protocols-dns-b...@isc.org > Sent: Thu, October 28, 2010 9:49:46 PM > Subject: Re: out of place mx records. > > > In message , Barry >Mar > golin writes: > >

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-28 Thread Mark Andrews
In message , Barry Mar golin writes: > In article , > Tony Finch wrote: > > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Gregory Machin wrote: > > > > > > My question is why would "INMX10mcvpemr01" and "INMX > > > 10mcvpemr02" be repeated trough the zone file surely this is > > > redundant ? > >

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-28 Thread Barry Margolin
In article , Tony Finch wrote: > On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Gregory Machin wrote: > > > > My question is why would "INMX10mcvpemr01" and "INMX > > 10mcvpemr02" be repeated trough the zone file surely this is > > redundant ? > > Some hostmasters like to ensure that mail is not dir

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-28 Thread Phil Mayers
On 28/10/10 11:56, Tony Finch wrote: On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Gregory Machin wrote: My question is why would "INMX10mcvpemr01" and "INMX 10mcvpemr02" be repeated trough the zone file surely this is redundant ? Some hostmasters like to ensure that mail is not directed to host

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-28 Thread Tony Finch
On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Gregory Machin wrote: > > My question is why would "INMX10mcvpemr01" and "INMX > 10mcvpemr02" be repeated trough the zone file surely this is > redundant ? Some hostmasters like to ensure that mail is not directed to hosts that do not listen on SMTP. They

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-27 Thread Andrey G. Sergeev (AKA Andris)
Hello Gregory, Thu, 28 Oct 2010 15:54:32 +1300 Gregory Machin wrote: > Hi Andrey. > Thanks for you input. > > OK .. but most of those hosts should not be accepting email > connections, buy my understanding. Or is it implied that email > destined for that host would be handled by the email serv

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-27 Thread Barry Margolin
In article , Sten Carlsen wrote: > To me it looks redundant, "named-compilezone -o - zone file" should show > you how bind interprets these. > My guess is that they will be listed only once in the output. I suggest you try it, and you'll see that you guessed wrong. > > I don't see how they co

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-27 Thread Mathieu Imfeld
They prevent people who start a potentially rogue mailserver to receive mails. I.e. You centralize mails and make sure only your authorized mailserver receives them when you dont have full control over these boxes. -mat On Oct 28, 2010, at 8:48 AM, Sten Carlsen wrote: > To me it looks redunda

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-27 Thread Andrey G. Sergeev (AKA Andris)
Hello Sten, Thu, 28 Oct 2010 02:48:36 +0200 Sten Carlsen wrote: > To me it looks redundant, "named-compilezone -o - zone file" should > show you how bind interprets these. > My guess is that they will be listed only once in the output. > > I don't see how they could belong to each subdomain, to

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-27 Thread Sten Carlsen
To me it looks redundant, "named-compilezone -o - zone file" should show you how bind interprets these. My guess is that they will be listed only once in the output. I don't see how they could belong to each subdomain, to do that there should be a"@..." to set a new origin? On 28/10/10 2:14, Ia

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-27 Thread Ian Manners
Hi Gregory, >mail02 IN A 192.168.xx.xx > IN MX 10 mcvpemr01 > IN MX 10 mcvpemr02 >nelson IN A 202.xx.xx.1 > IN MX 10 mcvpemr01 > IN MX 10

Re: out of place mx records.

2010-10-27 Thread Andrey G. Sergeev (AKA Andris)
Hello Gregory, Thu, 28 Oct 2010 13:04:58 +1300 Gregory Machin wrote: > Hi. > I have taken over some dns servers, and the process of doing upgrade, > half way through the process.. > > I have a question about the zone files , as there is some > configuration here that I have not seen before and

out of place mx records.

2010-10-27 Thread Gregory Machin
Hi. I have taken over some dns servers, and the process of doing upgrade, half way through the process.. I have a question about the zone files , as there is some configuration here that I have not seen before and seems out of place. here is an excerpt of the zone file $TTL 14400 @