On Sun, Dec 16, 2001 at 02:06:57AM -0500, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > 3) Of course, it's also why programs like formail, when they generate an
> > answer, answer to the envelope sender by default
>
> Formail? What's that? Surely you don't mean formmail, that most ugly
As Jim Knoble pointed out, I was indeed refering to formail from procmail.
> Ah Marc, you're ignoring some very fundamental issues here. There's no
> reason to keep using broken stuff, especially when that broken stuff
As if we were the ones using the broken stuff. It's the people creating
loops who do, not us. I'm merely advocating more ways to deal with broken
stuff because their brokenness affects me.
You chose to ignore that and want to confine yourself to what you think the
RFCs say (for the record, I somewhat agree with your interpretation), but
again, I do not limit myself to what RFCs say, I also look at the real
world.
You chose to ignore the real world and live in your world of RFCs, and fully
RFC compliant people.
My point has been that you limit yourself in doing so, which is fine when
you run your mail server, but not fine when it affects other people's
mailing lists and mail servers.
> > All the MTA I've dealt with on UNIX (granted, that's a subset of what's out
> > there), allowed you to set -f"<>" or equivalent.
>
> Hmmmm.... and are you sure they've all obeyed? :-)
You are correct, in some configs, you will not be able to set it.
Well, you just loose one of the loop avoidance mechanisms. There are still a
few left, "Precedence:" being the first one obviously
One more time, Miguel and I are advocating for using as many mechanisms as
possible to avoid loops.
You are saying that we shouldn't use some of them because of your
interpretation of RFCs.
I simply don't agree, plain and simple.
You made your point clear, so did I, I know better than trying to change
your mind on anything, end of story.
> Perhaps you should try practicing at least some of what you preach then
> (RFC compliance, that is). I see you can't even get it right on your
> own domain it seems:
>
> Received: from m206-12.dsl.tsoft.com ([198.144.206.12] helo=moremagic.merlins.org)
>
> $ host -a moremagic.merlins.org
> moremagic.merlins.org A 204.80.101.251
Look, you say I'm a broken record, and what are you doing here?
I've already told you that I don't care that you have decided to do that
silly helo check. It of course gives you the advantage to say whatever you
want knowing that unless you get my answer through a list, you'll bounce the
mail I send you (which is why I typically ignore you since I can't answer
you anyway, and it's not fair for me to bore people on mailing lists with
what should be private mail).
In this case, my answer was typed from a laptop, which was plugged behind
m206-12.dsl.tsoft.com (masquerading gateway) at the time I flushed the
queue.
No, I will not reconfigure my mail to relay through different mail servers
depending on where I plug my laptop, no I will not change my MTA's config to
say helo with whatever IP it happens to sit behind when I flush the queue.
No, I do not have the time to setup SMTP AUTH + SSL on my laptop, just to
have the honor to be able to send you mail. I have correct headers and a
correct bounce address. This is all you should need from me.
Again, you are truly the only person on the internet who bounces my mail for
this reason, and I will not change because of you.
I'm not interested in whatever answer you may have, you've already showed us
the RFCs, and I told you that in the "real world", it can be a pain in the
ass to give a HELO value that matches the reverse DNS for the IP that
connects to you.
You chose to be needlessly anal, that's your right, I'm left with having to
ignore you, until you make claims of how things should be that are a bit too
bold IMO.
I have purposely ignored the rest of your arguments in this mail because our
respective positions are already clear and I have no desire to waste more of
my and this list's subscribers' time.
Marc
PS: If you choose to answer, I will obviously ignore it because I will not
continue this thread here, and you bounce my private mail.
--
Microsoft is to operating systems & security ....
.... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page:
http://marc.merlins.org/ | Finger marc_f@??? for PGP key
