Noel, Thanks. I was always bugged by this little oddity. The funny thing is that it was the overall unreliability of my ISPs mail server that sent me in search of my own server in the first place...James is good....me like James....
Oh, I can't recall if I've mentioned this before but I really appreciate all of the help, suggestions, and advice that I've recieved from Danny, Peter, and you over the past several months. Happy Holidays, Randy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "James Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 3:44 PM Subject: RE: Sending to user@[ip] address > Randy, > > I was afraid that you'd get that answer. From what I have read on qmail's > archives, they don't think too highly of the folks at Stalker software. > > If you put localhost back into the servernames set, it should allow these > e-mails to be processed. > > Danny wrote: > > I've come across at least one SMTP<->ARPA gateway which didn't, > > citing the rfc's recommendation that literals only ever be > > used as a temporary measure as a reason for not supporting them. > > AFAIK, RFC 2821 is the most recent that would effect that functionality. > Section 4.1.3 says "Sometimes a host is not known to the domain name system > and communication (and, in particular, communication to report and repair > the error) is blocked. To bypass this barrier a special literal form of the > address is allowed as an alternative to a domain name." > > In any event, the MTA is delivering the e-mail based upon the > address-literal, so they are partially honoring it. The problem is that > they are also corrupting the address by removing the address-literal. > > --- Noel > > -----Original Message----- > From: JRC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 15:59 > To: James Users List > Subject: Re: Sending to user@[ip] address > > > Noel, > > This was the response I got from cgp-support. > Outlook Express won't even consider letting me send an email to a recipient > formed like cgp's suggestions. Their first suggestion is really stupid, if I > knew the domain name why would I want to add the IP? > > ***************************** > The address in "to" is never modified. But the address in the mail envelope > CAN be just "user", i.e. the @[xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] can be cut off. If your > server has problems with that, use: > > user@domainname@[xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] > or even > user@[xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]@[xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] > > ****************************** > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "James Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 12:14 PM > Subject: RE: Sending to user@[ip] address > > > > Randy, > > > > CommuniGate Pro? You might want to contact [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > ask > > them if they comply with address-literals as defined by RFC 2821 4.1.3 > (aka > > domain-literals in RFC 822 6.2.3). > > > > --- Noel > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: JRC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 12:45 > > To: James Users List > > Subject: Re: Sending to user@[ip] address > > > > > > Noel, > > Your mail came through just fine. I also sent an email from one james > > account to another and it worked fine. I now suspect that my ISP mail > server > > has been hosing the deal all along.........Bad, Bad, CommuniGate Pro! > > Thanks, > > Randy > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
