In message <1258876416.1772.1346434315@???>,
Paul Rogers <paulgrogers@???> writes
>It's not the recipients that's a problem. It's the sender, reply-to,
>from, et al. They check validity of those, and "...@pika.lan" or
>"...@localhost" just don't cut it for them.
They're probably interested in reducing outgoing spam -- these sorts of
checks improve their chances of blocking junk; albeit they will prevent
perfectly sensible configurations from working :(
You may need to change to another provider if your view of sensible
fails to accord with theirs.
... that said, you certainly want to have (and it is reasonable for an
ISP to insist upon) a routeable address for the SMTP sender because
otherwise it's impossible to send you any delivery status notifications
(or other bounces).
It's also pretty unwise to have the Reply-To: unrouteable! though that's
your problem rather than that of worldwide mail systems!
>> BTW, Exim has had security issues in the past. They're rare, but have
>> happened. ISTR there was at least one issue somewhere between
>> 3.20 and 3.36 but the details escape me.
>
>This runs on a 32MB 486/33, kernel-2.2.26, ipchains, diald, pppd, and is
>just dialing in, sending some email to a select group, and hanging up.
>I'm sure there are more than just exim's security issues.
Then let us hope that you never stay online for more than a few seconds
(so you cannot pollute the Internet for the rest of us) or have any
personal data on your machine that you'd be loth to pass on to others :(
- --
richard Richard Clayton
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755
