From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/36394 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Russ Allbery Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Sender header? Date: 24 May 2001 22:20:19 -0700 Organization: The Eyrie Message-ID: References: <01May23.141128edt.115245@gateway.intersys.com> <01May24.115917edt.115250@gateway.intersys.com> <01May24.143521edt.115214@gateway.intersys.com> <01May24.153439edt.115213@gateway.intersys.com> <01May24.171325edt.115217@gateway.intersys.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035171986 8359 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:46:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:46:26 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 3910 invoked by alias); 25 May 2001 05:20:26 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 3905 invoked from network); 25 May 2001 05:20:26 -0000 Original-Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (171.64.13.23) by gnus.org with SMTP; 25 May 2001 05:20:26 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 21072 invoked by uid 50); 25 May 2001 05:20:19 -0000 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Stainless Steel Rat's message of "25 May 2001 00:11:12 -0400" User-Agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (Channel Islands) Original-Lines: 23 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36394 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:36394 Stainless Steel Rat writes: > * Russ Allbery on Thu, 24 May 2001 > | > It should have an MX record associated with it. All A records should > | > have associated MX records. > | There's nothing in any RFC that says that. > RFC 1912 does. That depends on what you mean by should. RFC 1912 definitely doesn't say SHOULD. It says that it's a good idea (and goes on to explain that it thinks it's a good idea for incredibly minor and unimportant performance reasons, so personally I feel free to disagree with it -- the added minor complexity is more of a drawback to me than the incredibly minor performance difference is a win). In practice, there's no important reason for a host that receives e-mail for itself and that doesn't have a backup mail server to have an MX record. An A record is entirely sufficient. -- Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)