Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 8 Sep 1997 20:16:07 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
To:        gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu
Cc:        hackers@hub.freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: spam and the FreeBSD mailing lists
Message-ID:  <199709082016.NAA05350@usr09.primenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <19970907192536.54931@hydrogen.nike.efn.org> from "John-Mark Gurney" at Sep 7, 97 07:25:36 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> no...  your not correct... read what the rfc821 has to say about it:
>             MAIL <SP> FROM:<reverse-path> <CRLF>
> 
>          This command tells the SMTP-receiver that a new mail
>          transaction is starting and to reset all its state tables and
>          buffers, including any recipients or mail data.  It gives the
>          reverse-path which can be used to report errors.  If accepted,
>          the receiver-SMTP returns a 250 OK reply.

Heh.

Tell me, does it reset the ESMTP state (EHLO/HELO), the RFC1893
"ENHANCED STATUS" extension, the RFC2034 "ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES"
extension, which *requires* RFC1893, the supplied greeting domain
name, the draft-standard key exchange client authentication,  etc.?

Nope... (that was a rhetorical question).

8-) 8-).


>          The <reverse-path> can contain more than just a mailbox.  The
>          <reverse-path> is a reverse source routing list of hosts and
>          source mailbox.  The first host in the <reverse-path> should be
>          the host sending this command.
> 
> two key sentences... a) "It gives the reverse-path which can be used to
> report errors." b) "The frist host in the <reverse-path> should be the
> host sending this command."  basicly it states that the MAIL From must
> be a perfectly representable mail address to YOU...  if this forces the
> person to add "@relay.host.name" at the end, then be it..  but it clearly
> states that if the recieving end doesn't accept it, they don't have to...

I think you are confusing explicit relaying with target address
parsing under gatewaying.

Gatewaying uses characters which are not special characters (for
example, "%" and "!"), embedded in a valid mailbox address, and
given significance by the gateway machine when performin address
encapsulation and deencapsulation.

Relaying uses source routing using the special characters "@", ";", ",",
and ":", for example "@one;@two:joe@three".  Relaying uses syntactically
valid constructs with special characters as gramatically defined token
seperators.  In effect, in a "MAIL FROM:<...>" for this, the first
relay component must exist and be locally contactable by this machine,
even if the subsequent component(s) are not (the difference between
the "," and ";" are equivalence lists vs. route order lists).

This is different than requiring the entire mail address to be locally
presentable.

Instead of reading section "3.1 MAIL", try reading sections "3.6 RELAYING".

The act of transport encapsulation (required for gatewaying) is dicussed
only briefly in 821.  There is actually a seperate RFC for it, but I
don't have any of my RFC's in front of me now, so I can't give you an
exhaustive list; sorry.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199709082016.NAA05350>