[43698] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Re: Postmaster 'best practices' query
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Batchelor)
Tue Oct 23 14:30:22 2001
From: "Mike Batchelor" <mikebat@tmcs.net>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:29:31 -0700
Message-ID: <LLEOLJEDPHOFANPCPKOMKENECEAA.mikebat@tmcs.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20011022120443.02d2a8c8@127.0.0.1>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> The Host Requirements RFC also says, I believe, that you are to
> respond to PING -- try that with www.microsoft.com. My point is,
> it appears that the Host Requirements RFC seems to be "interpreted"
> in the real world. Lots of sites seem to not implement postmaster.
My pet peeve is "501 bogus mail from" in response to "mail from:<>", as
required by RFC1123. This just fills up my double-bounce mailbox with other
people's bounces, and deprives senders of notification of delivery failures.
So I stopped accepting mail from domains that refuse their own bounces.
Ipswitch Imail is usually the culprit, with the "refuse null sender"
mis-feature.
- ---
"The avalanche has already begun. It is too late for the pebbles to vote" -
Kosh
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBO9W3C0ksS4VV8BvHEQIHVQCgpHU6wGJwLFK9z5mTB8mSxP22msEAn0yA
9ZDao1YnuzwHAMmiXg8w0J+A
=90em
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
