|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
To: Gerardo Gregory <ggregory@affinitas.net>
Cc: Richard Irving <rirving@onecall.net>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 03 Apr 2003 15:58:53 CST."
<courier.3E8CAE9D.00002141@affinitas.org>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 17:09:29 -0500
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_686562163P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, 03 Apr 2003 15:58:53 CST, Gerardo Gregory said:
> I have always been under the impression (or taught at least) that an MX
> record was necessary (required) for mail exchange. I at least believed that
> this was the correct way. Recently, we implemented a new mail server at our
It's the preferred way, but not required.
Then there's those bozo sites (mostly spammers) that ignore MX and go
directly to the A record value.. Blegga...
--==_Exmh_686562163P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQE+jLEZcC3lWbTT17ARAkMsAKDyQR0wwtFIarbyQfs4CggeV6TL3gCg4Jrp
vBPi5MMYoo9a65ArlUQo9wM=
=+Nc3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_686562163P--
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |