Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 18:39:10 +0100 From: Jason Thomson <jason.thomson@mci.com> To: Josef Karthauser <joe@pavilion.net>, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sendmail 8.9.x check_mail anti-spam rule broken? Message-ID: <377BA7BE.2949010@btinternet.com> References: <377B53F8.34DE5461@mintel.co.uk> <30282.930836272@verdi.nethelp.no> <377B977B.644C021D@mci.com> <19990701181632.P69050@pavilion.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
That's what I thought. At first, I thought that sendmail was rejecting domains that did not have an A record. Sendmail's check_mail anti spam rules do reject addresses that don't "resolve". I wasn't sure whether "resolve" meant that the domain name had to have an A record. In fact, I _think_ it means that the name has to have one or more MX records, or ultimately resolve to an IP address (i.e. there is a server to send return mail to). It seems that BT Internet's name servers were temporarily broken (my server is now accepting mail from btinternet.com). Thanks to all for the advice and info. Josef Karthauser wrote: > You don't need A recs for mail delivery, only MX records. Sendmail can > be set to accept mail from _any_ domain, although antispamming rules > could be set to make sure that the domain exists (i.e. there are some > name servers somewhere carrying it), and valid MX records are in existence. > I see no reason for sendmail to do an 'A rec' test; in fact I've got over > 1000 domains here that don't have any A records at all. > > Joe > -- > Josef Karthauser FreeBSD: How many times have you booted today? > Technical Manager Viagra for your server (http://www.uk.freebsd.org) > Pavilion Internet plc. [joe@pavilion.net, joe@uk.freebsd.org, joe@tao.org.uk] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?377BA7BE.2949010>