[ale] Why ALE hated my email and how I fixed it

[mbt at zest.trausch.us (Michael B. Trausch)]

On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 00:35 -0500, Richard Bronosky wrote:
> As it would turn out, I made some choices with my DNS that didn't
> offend Google, Yahoo!, Comcast, or AT&T. (They would all deliver to
> and accept mail from me.) ALE/Mailman on the other hand would not do
> either.
> 
> My DNS looked like this:
> bronosky.com.    IN    CNAME   bronosky.com.
> mail             IN    CNAME   bronosky.com.
> slice1           IN    A       174.143.204.116
> bronosky.com.    IN    MX    0 slice1.bronosky.com.
> bronosky.com.    IN    MX    0 bronosky.com.
> bronosky.com.    IN    MX    0 mail.bronosky.com. 

This looks valid per RFC 5321.  Is it a bug in the Mailman software (or
the version of it) that we are using here on this list?  Did you have
any problems with any other lists?  From RFC5321, "If a CNAME record is
found [during an MX lookup], the resulting name is processed as if it
were the initial name."

	--- Mike

-- 
Blog:  http://mike.trausch.us/blog/
Misc. Software:  http://mike.trausch.us/software/

?The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too
high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving
our mark.? ?Michelangelo