At 9:13 am -0400 2004/10/25, David Brodbeck wrote:
> > From: Stephen Gran [mailto:steve@lobefin.net]
>
>> On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 08:58:54AM -0400, David Brodbeck said:
> > > Sure about that? I saw an example of one host that was
>> permanently listed
> > > in rfc-ignorant for a sequence like this:
>> >
>> > EHLO host.domain.com
>> > 250 OK
>> > MAIL FROM:<>
>> > RCPT TO:<postmaster@yourdomain>
>> > 550 Rejected; use a real MAIL FROM address.
>> >
>> > Apparently they aren't too picky about what circumstances
>> they'll add people
>> > under. They do seem to be pretty picky about when they'll
>> remove people.
>> > This is why I don't use that blacklist to reject mail.
>>
>> Are you reading what you wrote? They are rejecting on mail from:<>,
>> which is a legitimate reason to be listed in dsn.rfc-ignorant.
>
>Yes, but the previous poster was arguing that it only happened if you
>rejected all mail from <>. This site was only rejecting mail to the
>postmaster with a null sender; other addresses accepted null sender mail. I
>don't want to get into the argument about whether that's a proper thing to
>do or not, but it's just not true that rfc-ignorant is particularly strict
>about what evidence they accept.
I hate intervening in this extremely interesting thread... but I
think it is the error message above the cause of the listing, from
<
http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/policy-dsn.php>:
the rejection message clearly indicates the reason for denial as not
being something related to the null-envelope (or above-mentioned
timeout) ("{ip} rejected as listed on the MAPS RBL", etc.), then that
spam-blocking shall not be considered grounds to list a domain.
Thus a message like:
550 Rejected; postmaster@yourdomain does not send mail, so it does
not accept DSNs.
presumably would have not been listed.
Giuliano
