On 25/10/06, Beber <beber@???> wrote: > Le mer 25 oct 2006 15:49:32 CEST, « Dave Evans » à écrit :
>
> > On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 03:40:42PM +0200, Beber wrote:
> >> Is there good reason on a common usage to disallow any connection with
> >> HELO instead of EHLO ?
> >
> > There's a good reason /not/ to do that - RFC2821:
> >
> > "However, for compatibility with older conforming implementations, SMTP
> > clients and servers MUST support the original HELO mechanisms as a
> > fallback."
>
> Hum.. Yes. But: Could it be enable only when a ESMTP failed ? Cause I
> want that people USE auth, and auth with SMTP is not possible.
Then you're trying to fix the wrong problem.
require authenticated = *
in some ACL would ensure that no unauthenticated mail is accepted. If
you're sure that's what you want...
