[ On Mon, July 6, 1998 at 21:18:34 (-0500), Jay Maynard wrote: ]
> Subject: MTAs and spam
>
> This is the first I've ever heard of an MX record being other than purely an
> optional way of collecting incoming mail on one machine for processing. I
> suspect I'm far from alone. If an MX record is suddenly being defined as
> being required, I would think it should be shouted from the rooftops...

MX records have *always* been "required" for mailers -- however due to
initial skepticism in the community of those who feard the extra
overhead and complexity of DNS exceptions were allowed.  Unfortunately
those exceptions have become the assumed rule and have never been
retired now that *everyone* runs DNS, and the bandwidth requirements for
DNS are no longer larger than any other protocol on the net (or indeed
the combined traffic of all other protocols on the net, as I seem to
remember at least some dissenters were fearing in the early days).

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 443-1734      VE3TCP      <gwoods@acm.org>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>