On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 07:50:51PM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> [ On Friday, October 24, 2003 at 22:57:26 (+0100), Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: [Exim] Refuse connection if no MX for sending host
> > That's not an answer to what Tony wrote. There is a valid email address
> > at that host, but there is no valid postmaster@<hostname> address.
> Yes, actually there is. Please learn SMTP properly before you go
> spouting such nonsense in the future.
Oh, I have, and unlike you, I can back it up with a quote:
Section 4.5.1, RFC2821:
| The requirement to accept mail for
| postmaster implies that RCPT commands which specify a mailbox for
| postmaster at any of the domains for which the SMTP server provides
| mail service, as well as the special case of "RCPT TO:<Postmaster>"
| (with no domain specification), MUST be supported.
If the host name is not a valid domain part (in this case it's not), then
there is no requirement for a postmaster address, which is what I said
above. The SMTP server is not providing mailservice for the domain which
is its hostname.
> > The
> > valid address is the unqualified postmaster address.
> Well, actually that's a second required-to-be-valid address.
Please go back and read the RFCs before spouting such rubbish.
MBM
--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm@???> http://colondot.net/
