From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jul 24 14:50:14 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA26402 for current-outgoing; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 14:50:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA26397 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 14:50:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id OAA18268; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 14:46:27 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199707242146.OAA18268@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: (over)zealous mail bouncing To: Anthony.Kimball@East.Sun.COM Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 14:46:26 -0700 (MST) Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199707241601.LAA03086@compound.east.sun.com> from "Tony Kimball" at Jul 24, 97 11:01:48 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > : To sum it up: The problem of spammers using bogus names to hide behind > : is a far, far greater problem than not being able to send mail to > : those comparatively few individuals without valid hostnames, so using > : the "99.9% vs .1%" value rule, you simply lose. :-) > > I beg to differ. Most machines which may validly receive email do *not* > have valid hostnames. Using the majority-minority rule, *you* lose. > That's reality. Heh. But the filtering currently in place does not affect the ability of your bogus box to validly *receive* email. 8-). > Please do not intentionally damage global email. The system can only > take so much damage before it will no longer be able to route around > it. It's kinda like freon and the ozone that way, only more catastrophic. Please read the FAQ on www.sendmail.org. You should be claiming a return address of "name@domain" for the terminal (not necessarily externally visibile) mail exchanger. I have to warn you that several mail server products of which I'm aware actualy verify via getpeername/gethostbyaddr (RARP), and will reject your host anyway. To get around this problem, you need to specify your ISP's mail hast as a "smarter host" and your ISP must allow mail relay from you, as his customer. You will need to do this when (not if) you run into this type of filtering at some other site. In the current situation, you are only being rejected based on your claimed domain (either in your "HELO domain" argument or your "MAIL FROM:" argument, so correctly configuring your sendmail to claim that outbound mail from the inbound address which serves your maildrop is the correct thing to do. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.