18

Outlook and a number of other email clients now feature autodiscovery of mail server settings and it bugs me that I don't have this set up for our domains, but I'm not sure how to do it and a quick google hasn't turned up anything. I presume it's done with some kind of SRV record in DNS - is this correct and if so what's the correct format?

22

I am sorry I might be late to the party here. If you are still looking for a solution, I spent a weekend figuring out how to provide Auto Configuration (autodiscover what Outlook 2010 calls it) for most popular email clients including iOS.

I wrote it all down in a blog post here: http://moens.ch/2012/05/31/providing-email-client-autoconfiguration-information/ (also available via archive.org)

Outlook 2010 actually does a combination of DNS lookup and XML config. It first does a SRV lookup for _autodiscover._tcp.<yourdomain> and then does an xml POST request to your autodiscover url and expects an XML response. My post contains samples of the XML response and a link to the full autodiscover xml Response spec on MS technet.

In short: You can provide full autodiscover functionality to your users even without Exchange server.

8

RFC 6186 describes how to use SRV records for e-mail services. Summary:

  • SRV records like _submission._tcp SRV 0 1 587 mail.example.com. and _pop3, _pop3s, _imap, _imaps. (Last number is the port number.)
  • When offering both IMAP and POP, use the first number to show which is preferred (lower is preferable).

I don't know which MUA's already implement this. Maybe KMail. Thunderbird not yet?

2

So far as I know, the (Outlook) feature requires Exchange 2007 or later.

  • I don't think it's an exchange feature, because you don't have to put in the address of your mail server... – Whisk Aug 19 '10 at 16:59
  • Apologies - just found this exchangeexchange.com/forums/t/551.aspx - looks like it does use dns but is exchange specific... – Whisk Aug 19 '10 at 17:03
  • No worries, it wouldn't be the first time Microsoft had commandeered a bit of terminology and implemented it in a way that stomps all over someone else's standard. :/ – Kara Marfia Aug 19 '10 at 19:38
  • Yep, and again not for the first time it's one of those things that you wish the internet would manage to sort out a single standard for, but it never happens :/ – Whisk Aug 19 '10 at 22:22

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.