[155147] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Is Hotmail in the habit of ignoring MX records?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael J Wise)
Sat Jul 28 00:46:21 2012
From: Michael J Wise <mjwise@kapu.net>
In-Reply-To: <20120728034714.9AB1B2319025@drugs.dv.isc.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 21:45:39 -0700
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jul 27, 2012, at 8:47 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <25F0B21A-0319-45E3-9DBF-9906CB77AC6C@kapu.net>, Michael J =
Wise writ
> es:
>>=20
>> On Jul 27, 2012, at 6:40 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>=20
>>> MX records don't "chain".
>>=20
>> But they do, "Expand".
>> And I can think of a way whereby if an MX record referenced itself, =3D=
>> *AND* included something extra =3D85 (did you see the something =
extra?)
>>=20
>> That it would be possible (and I'm not saying this is what is =
happening, =3D
>> but =3D85 it could be) =3D85
>> That an internal process could go resolving MX records, and adds them =
=3D
>> all to an internal table, until it figures it's got 'em all=3D85
>>=20
>> "Gotta Get 'Em All!"
>>=20
>> =3D85 and maybe, just maybe =3D85 it exhausts the table space, and =
gives up, =3D
>> and tries the A record.
>>=20
>> I'm not saying this would be "Standard".
>=20
> It would be broken.
I'm not disputing it.
I'm also not saying it is, or it isn't, because I don't know.
What I am saying is, what I do know is, that you probably can't open a =
Sev A DCR ticket with HotMail, and neither can I.
That, and =85 it would seem there may be two things broken.
And that fixing the MX "recursion" may re-cloak the apparent bug in =
HotMail.
Maybe.
Which one can be fixed faster?
Aloha,
Michael.
--=20
"Please have your Internet License =20
and Usenet Registration handy..."
