>We would like to encourage you to bring your software into line with
>existing and established Internet standards

This royal "we" and his general holier-than-thou, RFC-bible-thumping 
attitude really ticked me off, obviously.  :))

>But this is an anti-spam standard, so completely inline with current
>industry accepted standards.
>
>Actaully, I've had to deal with this same issue from a vendor I deal
>with, who of course cant send me email, and that is a filter/check that
>catches way too much to remove.

I can offer the guy two solutions:

1. In his MTA's hosts file, he puts Imail's ip for the the primary MX's 
hostname (IMGate).

ip.ad.re.ss im1.webshoppe.net

He will send his msgs to the correct primary MX hostname found in DNS, but 
to the "wrong" ip for that MX hostname taken from hosts file, and so 
directly to unfiltered Imail.

2. On IMGate, I can nulroute his MTA's ip, so that when it tries to send to 
IMGate as primary MX, it will timeout and fail, and "should" fallback to 
the secondary MX which is unfiltered Imail.  The problem with this is if 
his sending ip is also his MX's ip, then IMGate won't be able to send to 
his nulrouted ip.

Len


Reply via email to