Re: [Exim] Domain literals: weighing up the arguments

> > However, the modicum of effort it takes to accept postmaster@[]
> > addresses with Exim (modulo IPv6 bugs) cannot possibly be interpreted as
> > outwith the description 'every reasonable effort'.
>
> If the server accepts:
> RCPT TO:<postmaster>
> Who cares? =)
>
> At one time, I thought it was neat that you could email to an IP. Now I
> don't see any valid reason for it (Of course inspite of what some will say).
>

For once, I find myself arguing (at least partly) on Greg Woods' side. If a
particular server is required to accept "postmaster", then I believe it should
also accept postmaster@[thatip]. Greg is correct when he says that [thatip]
is simply another representation of the server's address.

Sadly, if everyone took Greg's advice regarding proper reverseDNS, this would
be a non-issue! (Yes, I know, it's not always possible due to PITA ISPs - I
have one of those myself).

Which leads me to my final conclusion on the matter:

If you are running an SMTP server, which is (a) required to accept mail for
"postmaster"; and, (b) does *not* both receive & accept mail for
postmaster@YourReverseDNS; then, you should accept postmaster@[ipliteral].

Iff (a) or (b) is false, then you may be justified in not accepting
postmaster@[ipliteral].

Jim Roberts
Punster Productions, Inc.