At 1:07 -0400 2003/06/27, Greg A. Woods wrote:
>What's even funnier is that someone with known bad reverse DNS would
>dare to run active sender address verifications.
>
>Active sender address verifcation by SMTP is evil -- it does nothing
>that cannot be done just as well by far less error-prone means.
>
oh, you are so wrong here...! Reverse DNS is not a requirement of
SMTP, forward DNS is, and his forward DNS is fine. Sender address
validity is a requirement, and not accepting a sender callout attempt
a foolish act. If you wanted you could still reject the delivery of a
message (rejecting at the DATA phase) while accepting at the RCPT
phase. This is what I do with my spam score/delays, I do not apply
them for null-sender-single-recipient until the data phase (and no
delay at the data phase as it is probably pointless with bulk
mailers).
Now I CCed you just to see your nice rules in action (I am on a fixed
address ADSL with "bad" reverse and proper forward DNS).
If you will reply to me your message will get through even if you do
not accept the sender callout, as long as you do not score too many
points on other grounds.. as you can see rules can be a bit more
refined than just black and white.
I know, this discussion is a bit pointless...
Giuliano
--
H U M P H
|| |||
software
Java & C++ Server/Client/Human Interface applications on MacOS - MacOS X
http://www.humph.com/
