[Mailman-Users] To: is being rewritten by some mail agents
scott_list at mischko.com
Thu Jul 13 19:21:05 CEST 2006
Brad Knowles wrote:
> The receiving server is doing address canonicalization, as required by
> the RFCs. The fact that your server is not doing the address
> canonicalization is a serious bug, and should be fixed.
>> Any thing I can do to fix this?
> The real solution is not to use CNAMEs at all in your DNS, but instead
> to have the hostnames resolve directly into the appropriate IP
> addresses, and to make sure that the reverse DNS for that IP address
> includes all the appropriate hostnames.
How does one implement the real solution when the DNS records that are being
virtual hosted are from different registrars? Since I only have one IP
address, the reverse DNS would have to be handled by the outfit I'm hosting
from, right? I didn't know you could even have more than one name come up in
a reverse DNS lookup. I thought it was always supposed to be the canonical
name only (if I'm using that term correctly).
I also wonder why the RFC's require address canonicalization in email like
that. That seems a holdover from a bygone era. The reason I have all the
CNAME's is so that I can move to a different IP address and have to change the
DNS record in only one place. I don't mind getting rid of the CNAME's but
getting the reverse DNS all configured correctly will be interesting.
More information about the Mailman-Users