dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote: > On 02/11, Henrik K wrote: > >> What a complex scheme you invented for a simple problem. All you have to do >> is to require legimate relays to have a FCrDNS entry with an actually >> identifiable name, like starting with "smtp". Much simpler to take advantage >> of that and it actually is somewhat used today. >> > > I did consider this, but I didn't think it was reasonable to expect people > to change the host names of their transmitting mail servers. MTX has > the advantage of only listing mail servers that transmit legitimately, not > including servers that only receive, although it might be a distinction > worth losing in exchange for increased adoption. >
And you do think it is reasonable to expect people to create an entirely new DNS subtree? Personally, I would rather change the server name. > I encourage you to get your method standardized. It might work better. > In the mean time, I think mine has a better chance of adoption because > there is no reason not to create the records. > > Perhaps I should consider ".smtp." in a hostname a "pass" for MTX? > I'd prefer not to use that particular string since it's associated with > receiving servers more than transmitting. I'd be tempted to do ".mtx.", > except I'm concerned about administrators unaware of it allowing spammers > to have hostnames including it. Same for ".smtp.", actually. I like > the separate MTX record because it's very explicit identification of a > legitimate transmitting mail server. > "mail" and "mta" are also fairly common. And don't forget things like "smtp01", "smtp02", etc. -- Bowie
