Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 30 Nov 2000 16:44:42 -0600 (CST)
From:      David Talkington <dtalk@prairienet.org>
Cc:        questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Sendmail rulesets.
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011301624100.664-100000@sherman.spotnet.org>
In-Reply-To: <14886.53936.218132.518054@guru.mired.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

>Christoph Sold <so@server.i-clue.de> types:
>> You are right. It is the MX IP that must resolve both ways. Shame there 
>> are some providers who don't worry about reverse lookup.

Periodic problems with reverse lookups are understandable, cuz
administrators are always overworked. Usually, a note to them will
take care of it.  That said, if my ISP had this problem and flatly
refused to bother to fix it, I wouldn't call it a shame; I'd call it a
breach of contract and take my business elsewhere -- though I
recognize that in some areas, that may not be an option.

There are many reasons that reverse lookup must work.  Downloading
128-bit encryption packages in the US used to mean authentication by
IP, and that required a valid reverse lookup; ssh will frequently balk
if it can't do a reverse lookup on the client; hell, even some of the
educational servers around here reject finger requests from IPs that
don't resolve both ways. That's part of basic internet connectivity,
IMHO.

I'll shut up now.



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.21.0011301624100.664-100000>