On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 05:23:31PM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> Error handling in SMTP (i.e. the use of newly generated notifications
> messages which are sent to the original sender address, and with a null
> sender path) is a core feature and requirement of the SMTP protocol. It
> is inherent in its store-and-forward design and it "MUST" (STD's 3 & 10)
> not be messed with if e-mail is to enjoy any degree of robustness and
> reliability.
>
> Therefore a robust implementation of SMTP "MUST" make it difficult for
> an ignorant postmaster to purposefully screw up e-mail error handling.
I guess this would include not rejecting HELOs based on the forward/reverse
DNS checks like, oh, your smail. So what you're saying is, smail prevents
reliable error handling by your broken DNS checks, but that's not broken;
Exim allows you to break (by use of a language that is almost, but not quite
complete) certain aspects of the protocol (see above) but that is.
If it were to give you a message saying
"550 badly configured host most.weird.com", after that final dot, would you
still be upset with exim? (In this case, I do suspect clueless admins, but
the point holds).
Cheers
MBM
--
Matthew Byng-Maddick <mbm@???> http://colondot.net/
(Please use this address to reply)
