Re: bind timeouts

On 18 May, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> no.  it means an MX referring to a CNAME which resolves to an A
>> Not by my reading.
> 
> then maybe try reading rfc 2181 sec 10.3

This part of RFC 2181 is a fairly substantial change from RFC 974, which
is interesting because RFC 2181 also says:

 Abstract

   This document is a self-contained specification of the basic protocol
   for the Internet electronic mail transport.  It consolidates, updates
   and clarifies, but doesn't add new or change existing functionality
   of the following:

   -  the original SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) specification of
      RFC 821 [30],

   -  domain name system requirements and implications for mail
      transport from RFC 1035 [22] and RFC 974 [27],