[Users] ENUM behaviour issue
klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at
Mon Aug 8 14:22:08 CEST 2005
Juha Heinanen wrote:
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
> > not without development, but I would love to have these options. Never
> > took a deep look at enum module, but adding AVPs is not at all a big
> > deal. I will try to make a patch, if no one else volunteers.
> if you do these kind of modifications, please don't do it at the expense
> of performance of current, standards compliant operation of the module.
Can you point me to the standard which says: multiple records = parallel
> just for curiosity, can you override the behavior of your email client
> so that it doesn't obey the priority of MX records? if not, why would
> it be necessary for enum records?
I've never heard about forked emails...
More information about the sr-users