[sf-lug] SF-LUG & MX records, etc. (sf-lug at lists.sf-lug.org, or ... )

[jim]

     What's the argument for sf-lug.* MX records?
     The only one I can see is to have a postmaster@
(and perhaps info@ and one or two other administrative
email names) so's people can notify, complain, etc.
with respect to the sf-lug web site.
     Myself, I don't see the need, but I defer to y'all;
't would be nice to understand.




On 01/02/2016 07:38 AM, Michael Paoli wrote:
> Daniel (and Rick and Jim),
>
> Daniel - Ah, you're about half a step ahead of me.  :-)
>
> Yes, I remember the earlier communications, regarding email and the
> sf-lug list and such.  I was thinking along relatively similar lines,
> but with a slight difference - if/presuming Rick (and Jim, and yourself
> or anyone else relevant that it may matter to), rather than have
> the MX records for the domains go to linuxmafia.com, I was instead
> thinking subdomain, e.g.:
>
> lists.sf-lug.org. IN MX 50 linuxmafia.com.
> (and any other applicable records, e.g. A, AAAA, TXT, SPF, ...)
> ... heck, could even delegate as a DNS subdomain (that might be
> teensy bit overkill, but certainly also highly doable).
>
> Yes, there are pros and cons of doing vs. not doing a subdomain,
> but I think the arguments for doing subdomain (and with or without DNS
> delegation) (slightly?) outweigh those of not going with subdomain.
>
> Here's the pros I come up with for sub-domain:
>
> o allow for possible separate handling, origination, and administration
>   of email, namely list email and related resources can be
>   administratively quite independent (just delegate and all else is
>   quite independent).
> o allows for the possibility of mail such as:
>   security at sf-lug.org
>   webmaster at sf-lug.org
>   security at lists.sf-lug.org
>   webmaster at lists.sf-lug.org
>   to each go to appropriate administrative realms, and without either
>   having to first go through handling by one if it may be (much or more)
>   relevant to the other.
> o Each can (at least if desired) receive and originate mail, with
>   reduced probability of complications, interference, entanglements,
>   etc. of the other.
> o website stuff for list can work in manner quite corresponding with
>   email, e.g.:
>   sf-lug at lists.sf-lug.org
>   http://lists.sf-lug.org/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
>   and with the above, there can also be A (and if applicable AAAA)
>   record(s) to lists.sf-lug.org. independent of sf-lug.org.'s IP
>   address(es).  Can also potentially set up separate web page(s) with
>   same subdomain, e.g.:
>   http://lists.sf-lug.org/
>   Could even potentially use rewrites/redirects to simplify:
>   http://lists.sf-lug.org/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
>   to just:
>   http://lists.sf-lug.org/
>   and serve up same content - whereas the above isn't really an option
>   without subdomain
> o And *wherever* it may go, lists.sf-lug.org. could be handled and
>   managed quite independently of sf-lug. - it also doesn't preclude such
>   from all being run off of the same site/host, if/when that might ever
>   be desired and feasible.
> o it may be at least somewhat more clear and intuitive as to
>   what sf-lug at lists.sf-lug.org is likely for (almost certainly would
>   appear to be some type of list related email address) as opposed to
>   sf-lug at sf-lug.org (clearly something to do with sf-lug, but what
>   exactly - maybe a generic contact address?)
> o if subdomain isn't used, can be more complex/hazardous, etc., to later
>   separate out to separate administration if/when that may be desired,
>   where sf-lug.org would have both list, and non-list email.
> o DNS - could even delegate lists.sf-lug.org. subdomain, thus delegating
>   even more direct control to the administrative realm handling
>   lists.sf-lug.org.
>
> Of course often nothing is 100% - we do also have the cons:
> o sf-lug at sf-lug.org is simpler and shorter than sf-lug at lists.sf-lug.org
>   - probably a bit easier for users to remember and type, etc. (they
>   might also forget, is it @list.sf-lug.org or @lists.sf-lug.org)
> o maybe there won't ever be particular need/reason/desire for
>   @sf-lug.org to have email independent of and unrelated to
>   @lists.sf-lug.org - and if so, why complicate by adding subdomain
> o probably not a huge deal to change it later if need be - it's not like
>   millions/billions of folks use it and there would continue to be
>   substantial traffic and links using a long-ago since changed email
>   address or web site addresses or URLs - so why sweat it?
>
> Anyway, think it over a bit, let me know your thoughts, and when we have
> something at least approximating consensus (at least among the relevant
> admin folks), I'll proceed with whatever we come up with, as far as the
> DNS and such goes.
>
> Oh, I *might* be at the SF-LUG meeting this Sunday ... about 50%
> probability at this point - I'll likely know much more specifically
> regarding that by late Saturday, or Sunday AM at the latest (turns out
> I'll be headed into San Francisco anyway - still working out the earlier
> parts of my schedule for that day).
>
>
>> From: "Daniel Gimpelevich" <daniel at gimpelevich.san-francisco.ca.us>
>> Subject: Re: [sf-lug] sf-lug.{com,info} --> www.sf-lug.org (canonical)
>> Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2016 22:26:17 -0800
>
>> On Fri, 2016-01-01 at 22:09 -0800, Michael Paoli wrote:
>>
>> While you're doing that, can you please kindly point the MX records for
>> all the domains to linuxmafia.com? Thanx
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/attachments/20160102/2a45061b/attachment.html>