Re: [Exim] Rfc 2821 par 4.1.4 is this still valid or was it…

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Giuliano Gavazzi
Date:  
To: Avleen Vig, Exim User's Mailing List
CC: lists
Subject: Re: [Exim] Rfc 2821 par 4.1.4 is this still valid or was it replace.
At 12:15 pm -0700 2004/07/03, Avleen Vig wrote:
>On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 02:56:40PM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
>> The SMTP client "MUST" give its proper canonical hostname in the
>> HELO/EHLO greeting (or a valid address literal). It "MUST NOT" lie and
>> give some other name which does not resolve to the address it connects
>> from.
>
>That's a fantastic interpretation of 2821.
>3.6:
>      -  The domain name given in the EHLO command MUST BE either a
>    primary host name (a domain name that resolves to an A RR) or,
>    if the host has no name, an address literal as described in
>    section 4.1.1.1.

>
>It says nothing about resolving correctly as a PTR. In fact, that you
>can give an address literal implies that IP addresses should not be
>resolved back to a hostname.


Greg hasn't mentioned or implied PTR records, indeed a "name"
(hostname) does not have PTR records (with the exception of course of
the IN-ADDR.ARPA zone).

Giuliano