[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <addc34c605031008444f1f269a@mail.gmail.com>
From: nocmonkey at gmail.com (Danny)
Subject: Reverse dns
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:57:57 -0600, Paul Schmehl <pauls@...allas.edu> wrote:
> Is there an RFC *requirement* for reverse dns?
No.
> I've been looking through the RFCs and I can't find it.
Right.
> Some folks think reverse dns should be completely disabled.
I wonder if these are the same folks who ignore most other best practices.
> I know for sure that this will break email, because many mail servers won't talk to a server
> that doesn't reverse.
For this reason, it is recommended (by me and many others) - but not
required - to implement valid reverse DNS for the IP addresses of your
SMTP servers.
[..]
> I'm also looking for a list of things that *break* when you disable reverse
> (e.g. mail).
Why disable it?
> RULES FOR RESPONDING:
> 1) "Reverse is a good thing" is not an answer. Neither is "Reverse is a
> bad thing".
Check.
> 2) Opinions are not useful - stick to facts only - chapter and verse
> please.
2 out of 3.
> 3) All replies to the list please - others will find this useful as well.
3 out of 3. Time for me to pick-up a lottery ticket.
...D
Powered by blists - more mailing lists