Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.protocols.dns.bind > #15962
| Path | csiph.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.etla.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!usenet-its.stanford.edu!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Matthew Richardson <matthew-l@itconsult.co.uk> |
| Newsgroups | comp.protocols.dns.bind |
| Subject | Re: Dumb Question is an A or AAAA record required? |
| Date | Thu, 09 Jul 2020 17:03:01 +0100 |
| Organization | I. T. Consultancy Limited, Jersey |
| Lines | 40 |
| Approved | bind-users@lists.isc.org |
| Message-ID | <mailman.685.1594310579.942.bind-users@lists.isc.org> (permalink) |
| References | <B1C7B197-34CE-42AB-92CC-69F65B35D3FD@kreme.com> <7ab19939-3025-c874-e5a4-97721eb435fc@ripe.net> <ep8egf1jv84i97uev69vr17ld66g4fave6@m78> <4250d5b0-65a7-2ee9-eb38-fa5c88734cf3@ripe.net> <1efegflt9d1etke3lusct951vddg8ght03@m78> |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | lists.isc.org |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| X-Trace | usenet.stanford.edu 1594310614 23401 149.20.1.60 (9 Jul 2020 16:03:34 GMT) |
| X-Complaints-To | action@cs.stanford.edu |
| To | bind-users@lists.isc.org |
| Return-Path | <matthew-l@itconsult.co.uk> |
| X-Original-To | bind-users@lists.isc.org |
| Delivered-To | bind-users@lists.isc.org |
| DKIM-Filter | OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 m78.itconsult.net 7B4CB8596C4 |
| DKIM-Signature | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=itconsult.co.uk; s=itcl-200420; t=1594310582; bh=ILB2IIyNslcQReXp4HxxwpAEorZRImRLdMZ3WT96DCw=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Rb4yXmoNdhOz/+Kckb2y56djp7/EjERNV7Tg8XgIWn4StzJkcijx1fYthH5a7OIvi CO4UhQdc66zlJ8thv2yfkL+0AL6Cya11lPjwNOixlbR6Re0u9ZdWfKU/eVNKEWxpnp GJRrC4Bg1Rj2O9JR/mCZuFiWPs4+npTly9CzoxuzeiKZ6MqEmkKyDGqt1yhLKro1ev UUvWNYE8h83x9EVXETpuB4rshzUgAaByVES+IIqfoChUDSBDuHNLeFir4HP0FNpmUR +BUjNE/DiD/JBqbh+y6cxn7olQTM7qSvEMhLEP18cSxc+TZSXNe/7t8m+k8uYIlPch WUbN3EQU0SLLg== |
| In-Reply-To | <4250d5b0-65a7-2ee9-eb38-fa5c88734cf3@ripe.net> |
| X-Mailer | Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American) |
| X-Spam-Status | No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_COUK,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 |
| X-Spam-Checker-Version | SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on mx.pao1.isc.org |
| X-BeenThere | bind-users@lists.isc.org |
| X-Mailman-Version | 2.1.29 |
| Precedence | list |
| List-Id | BIND Users Mailing List <bind-users.lists.isc.org> |
| List-Unsubscribe | <https://lists.isc.org/mailman/options/bind-users>, <mailto:bind-users-request@lists.isc.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| List-Archive | <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/> |
| List-Post | <mailto:bind-users@lists.isc.org> |
| List-Help | <mailto:bind-users-request@lists.isc.org?subject=help> |
| List-Subscribe | <https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users>, <mailto:bind-users-request@lists.isc.org?subject=subscribe> |
| X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID | <1efegflt9d1etke3lusct951vddg8ght03@m78> |
| X-Mailman-Original-References | <B1C7B197-34CE-42AB-92CC-69F65B35D3FD@kreme.com> <7ab19939-3025-c874-e5a4-97721eb435fc@ripe.net> <ep8egf1jv84i97uev69vr17ld66g4fave6@m78> <4250d5b0-65a7-2ee9-eb38-fa5c88734cf3@ripe.net> |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.protocols.dns.bind:15962 |
Show key headers only | View raw
My question is raised because of such "poor decisions" by certain web hosting providers (naming no names!) whose provisioning systems require records for both www and the domain root pointing to their systems, and where those systems DO LISTEN on port 25. In these modern days, should one be concerned about this for a domain where the MX records point to proper enterprise grade email services? The problem is that the web hosting provider's poor decision might interfere with the enterprise email system. I think Matus may be correct that this is only an issue if the MX query returns NODATA rather than timing out. In the old days (10-15 years ago), I think a timeout may have triggered the failback from MX to A, but I am not sure. Best wishes, Matthew ------ >From: Anand Buddhdev <anandb@ripe.net> >To: Matthew Richardson <matthew-l@itconsult.co.uk>, bind-users <bind-users@lists.isc.org> >Cc: >Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 17:06:13 +0200 >Subject: Re: Dumb Question is an A or AAAA record required? >On 09/07/2020 16:06, Matthew Richardson wrote: > >> On a related issues there were (perhaps long ago) issues if the A record >> for a domain had an SMTP server on it, where email could sometimes be >> delivered to that A record rather than the MX. I had (again long ago: >> 10-15 years) actually seen this occur. > >Note that *delivery* will only happen if that A record were actually >listening on tcp/25 and accepting SMTP connections. No-one should be >opening up the SMTP port on a server meant to serve only HTTP(S) >traffic. Anyone who does that deserves what they get for making such >poor decisions. > >Anand
Back to comp.protocols.dns.bind | Previous | Next | Find similar
Re: Dumb Question is an A or AAAA record required? Matthew Richardson <matthew-l@itconsult.co.uk> - 2020-07-09 17:03 +0100
csiph-web