From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Feb 25 15:45:25 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from draco.over-yonder.net (draco.over-yonder.net [198.78.58.61]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1360037B400 for ; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 15:45:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by draco.over-yonder.net (Postfix, from userid 100) id 9A4A8FC4; Mon, 25 Feb 2002 17:45:20 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 17:45:20 -0600 From: "Matthew D. Fuller" To: Terry Lambert Cc: "Jeremy C. Reed" , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: blocked mail Message-ID: <20020225174520.L47910@over-yonder.net> References: <3C7AC400.B8F3E9FC@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5-fullermd.1i In-Reply-To: <3C7AC400.B8F3E9FC@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 03:08:48PM -0800 X-Editor: vi X-OS: FreeBSD Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 03:08:48PM -0800 I heard the voice of Terry Lambert, and lo! it spake thus: > > In addition, the MX requirement is often that the sending > host be in the MX list for the "MAIL FROM " > domain part, or the mail will be refused as a suspicious > relay. That can't be right. Incoming MX servers, and outgoing sendmail servers, are often different. > Probably he meant the pre-RFC2821 standard, which is what > most mail servers on the In ternet still conform to today, > and probably will for a very long time (may Jon Postel's > name live forever). Now wait just a minute! You're not allowed to support me after I've backed down from a position! :-p The pre-2821 standard is RFC974, which says: --- It is possible that the list of MXs in the response to the query will be empty. This is a special case. If the list is empty, mailers should treat it as if it contained one RR, an MX RR with a preference value of 0, and a host name of REMOTE. (I.e., REMOTE is its only MX). In addition, the mailer should do no further processing on the list, but should attempt to deliver the message to REMOTE. The idea here is that if a domain fails to advertise any information about a particular name we will give it the benefit of the doubt and attempt delivery. --- Of course, it IS a SHOULD, not a MUST, but still... RFC821 doesn't seem to have anything to say about MX records and their utilization, it just defines the SMTP standard itself. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fullermd@over-yonder.net Unix Systems Administrator | fullermd@futuresouth.com Specializing in FreeBSD | http://www.over-yonder.net/ "The only reason I'm burning my candle at both ends, is because I haven't figured out how to light the middle yet" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message