in.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Scharff [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 9:15 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: ORB UK - cross post - long
I tested between the time you posted and the time I replied... and between
the time you replied and the time
Message-
From: Schwartz, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 8:41 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: ORB UK - cross post - long
And I guess that's where my question arises. In RFC2821 it
talks about the mail conversation. The conversation isn't
complete
RGH! I blame lack of caffeine for allowing myself to fall into the logic
trap both sides set up.
Yes, it appears that BBandT.com is not an open relay.
Yes, it appears that BBandT.com as configured is horribly non-RFC complaint.
Yes, orbz and other RBL services purport to report on open
Then again the part of the RFC discussing this uses should rather than
must.
- Original Message -
From: Chris Scharff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 8:15 AM
Subject: RE: ORB UK - cross post - long
I tested between the time
: Schwartz, Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 8:57 AM
Subject: RE: ORB UK - cross post - long
Chris,
Thanks.
I've found the configuration error. Our firewall was acting as a store and
forward device. Mail that was delivered
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Chenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 04 December 2001 16:01
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: Re: ORB UK - cross post - long
Note that relays are specifically mentioned in 2821. In the
discussion of relaying the bottom line
Note that relays are specifically mentioned in 2821. In the discussion
of relaying the bottom line is that a relay is not expected to do much
of anything at all, though it _should_ do xyz and _may_ do abc.
Agreed.
What he should be testing on is the return of the NDR.
No. There are three
: ORB UK - cross post - long
Note that relays are specifically mentioned in 2821. In the discussion
of relaying the bottom line is that a relay is not expected to do much
of anything at all, though it _should_ do xyz and _may_ do abc.
Agreed.
What he should be testing on is the return
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:06 AM
To: Exchange Discussions
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ORB UK - cross post - long
Note that relays are specifically mentioned in 2821. In the
discussion
The issue is that your testing methodology, specifically in requiring
relay denial prior to the DATA command, ignores both the spirit and the
letter of RFC 2821. While it is logical, and potentially beneficial, to
reject mail as early in the transaction as possible, there is no
requirement
]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 12:49 PM
To: Exchange Discussions
Subject: RE: ORB UK - cross post - long
The issue is that your testing methodology, specifically in requiring relay
denial prior to the DATA command, ignores both the spirit and the letter of
RFC 2821. While it is logical
11 matches
Mail list logo
