houston.rr.com MX fubar?

Suresh Ramasubramanian ops.lists at gmail.com
Tue Jan 15 02:38:28 UTC 2008


On Jan 14, 2008 5:08 PM, Tony Finch <dot at dotat.at> wrote:

> the "." convention then it will look up the root's AAAA and A records,
> which is stupid but should cause the message to bounce as desired. However
> if it does implement the convention (just like the "usage rules" for a SRV
> record target of "." in RFC 2782) then it can skip the address lookups and
> save the root some work. (It can also produce a better error message.)
> This really ought to be explained in draft-delany-nullmx.

The draft died.  And I think this stuff about looking up A / AAAA for
the root was certainly raised in the IETF sometime back.  Not that
there isnt enough junk traffic (and DDoS etc) coming the roots' way
that this kind of single lookup would get lost in the general noise ..

Might want to revive it and take it forward?  I rather liked that
draft (and Mark Delany cites me in the acknowledgements as I suggested
a few wording changes for the definition of a null MX - dot terminated
null string, STD13 etc, during his drafting of the document)

--srs

-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at gmail.com)



More information about the NANOG mailing list