[Maybe OT] - RFC compliance checking at session

[Rick Cooper]

 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info 
 > [mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info] On 
 > Behalf Of Glenn Steen
 > Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 5:21 PM
 > To: MailScanner discussion
 > Subject: Re: [Maybe OT] - RFC compliance checking at session
 > 
[...]
 > >  will violate. But if I can validate any part of the helo, 
 > I will accept the
 > >  message. But sans RDNS, heloing as BILLS_ROOM.local is 
 > getting the door
 > >  slammed for sure. You give a proper helo, have something 
 > like proper DNS and
 > >  even if you are a host on comcast's dynamic pool you will 
 > get past the helo,
 > >  probably won't get very far past it but you will get past it.
 > >
 > Mostly truee for 1123 too...
 > Since I get a good effect from the strict part, I don't do the rdns
 > valitation... When the srtictness checks stop being effective I might
 > start looking at it, but by then... there might be a new RFC 
 > outdating
 > both 2821 and 1123 (and 821, which is already superseded) that
 > actually tell us that we MUST validate the domain.... No, wait, that
 > ust be another beverage-induced fever-dream;-D.
 > 


The whole chain of supersession get's tiresome in and of it's self. I would
swear that I had read a 821 superssion that changed the wording of the MUST
not refuse to SHOULD not refuse.... But I hadn't the time to look it up.
Anyway you look at it local policy MUST always win. God wouldn't it be nice
to go back to the days when that hoax about just reading an email and
getting a virus was still just a hoax (thank you Bill Gates)?

Rick


--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.