I have an excellent reason for this... I think ;-)
I had a former employers box disconnected (we were all green once) because they were running a mail server that wouldn't accept mail to the IP address - they were being used as a relay, and although their upstream provider TRIED to contact them... So many things have been justified here as "It is in the RFC" - IF this method works on a wide variety of mail servers, and is RFC standard, then it should probably work on courier... Does it work on other servers? is it standard? Then my vote is to support it. m/ -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sam Varshavchik Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 8:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [courier-users] Re: RFC 2821/4.1.3 conformant @[ip_address] addressing not recognized by Courier? Julian Mehnle writes: > Julian Mehnle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> RFC 2821, section 4.1.3 explicitly allows @[ip_address]-style >> addressing (e.g. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>), but Courier >> doesn't. I get a "513 Syntax error" when trying to send a mail >> to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> through my own Courier >> installation. Why is that? > > Well, my question wasn't directed narrowly enough. Sam, could you please make a short statement? ;-) It's not supported, that's all. This archaic, pre-DNS address notation is not implemented or recognized. Now, please tell us why you need this, without referring to the RFC in any way. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
