Alan, everyone..
> It might be worth mentioning again that James appears to be
> an open rely server as it accepts everything and then
> validates ....
This debate is tired and old. James is not an open relay when configured correctly.
Period.
Spammers and blacklists are not stupid either, they can tell that this is so.
They send probing mail to see if it actually gets through.
James is not alone in this behaviour, all firewall mail gateways behave in exactly the
same way.
As Daz said this is, and has been, documented for some time at
http://james.apache.org/FAQ.html#2
The situation has not changed, James has not suddenly become an open relay.
> I believe that the SMTP should refuse connection by attempts
> outside the valid networks - by James accepting a
> connection, spammer bots will initially identify a James
> server as a possible gatweay and then flood it with it's
> first wave.
This is extremely rare, I've seen it once, and we've had one person mention it on the
users list.
The converse is true, that rejecting connections based on delivery address will allow
spammers to identify valid local addresses.
Furthermore to "refuse connection by attempts outside the valid networks" would mean
that no local delivery of mail originating outside the local network would be
possible.
> Some of the Open Relay checkers will initially flag a James
> server as an open relay since thjey can connect ...
This is untrue.
d.
