Discussion, please. See below for my take; the IETF is one host, MX is really meaningless, and there are benefits to avoiding a ton of spambot zombie spam. Begin forwarded message: > From: "Glen via RT" <ietf-action@xxxxxxxx> > Date: 25 February 2010 18:16:44 GMT > To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [rt.ietf.org #24364] mail.ietf.org. is ietf.org., Remove MX Records For Less Spam > Reply-To: ietf-action@xxxxxxxx > in-reply-to: <30D38818-DAA2-4439-A168-3AED6B3E0EB5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > references: <RT-Ticket-24364@xxxxxxxxxxx> <30D38818-DAA2-4439-A168-3AED6B3E0EB5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > message-id: <rt-3.6.5-24276-1267121804-1766.24364-6-0@xxxxxxxxxxx> > rt-ticket: rt.ietf.org #24364 > rt-originator: glen@xxxxxxxx > > Thank you! > > Regrettably, we got many MANY complaints in the past from IETF community > members who objected strongly to the absence of MX records. So although > I personally feel as you do, I cannot make the suggested change at this > time. > > Perhaps the spirit of things has changed. You are welcome to bring this > up on the IETF list if you want, and to quote this response. Having > been beaten down once, I'm not prepared to fight that battle again just > yet. :-) > > Glen > > On Thu Feb 25 06:08:22 2010, mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> In the spirit of abiding by the rules we strive so hard to write ... >> :-) >> >> mail.ietf.org. is ietf.org., so you can remove your MX records for >> ietf.org. This should cut down on spam since a lot of spambots >> will skip over domains whose MX list cannot be obtained. Real >> mailers will of course fall back to A/AAAA as per RFC 2821/5321. A >> few hosts will have trouble, but very, very few indeed, and that >> isn't your (our?) fault. >> >> Cheers, >> Sabahattin _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf