gourmet.spamgourmet.com [used to] not [be] reachable

[de552]

Would you believe that I was able to get 100% same information what you gave in your reply.

You didnt tell technically watch behind those IP addresses.

User was asking adding to mx records. It only means that you have two mx records. Ok, you also have two IP:s. But in matter of fact, those both IP addresses could point to same server machine and even same server instance.

Or there could be very simply tcp/ip connection forwarding service on another server. If primary goal is simply to get two MX records with different IPs.

Any comments about that?

[josh]

oh -- got confused about the threads -- nope that's the same box, just added the record because some machine was rejecting the server because it only had one record, and I figure that others are probably doing it, too.

[de552]

just added the record because some machine was rejecting the server because it only had one record.

I wonder why. I don't see any point why well working system MUST have a backup server. I would rather ask their policy, what's the point of having multiple servers. I'm quite sure there are tons of sites with only A record, and MX record is completely missing. But even that won't prevent delivering mail to SMTP server at that address...

Email can be delivered to IP address without DNS, as well as to any other address.

- Strange policy...

[josh]

yeah -- I think it was just their way of attempting to identify a "real" mail host as opposed to a hastily constructed spam sending server.

[de552]

Almost as stupid as this method.

"Nolisting, which fights spam by specifying a primary MX that is always unavailable."

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/23/0220218