> Am 2010-11-09 15:22:58, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: > > Since there's fallback to "A" record defined in RFC, there is no way to > > indicate that an existing host is accepting mail. Mail from A host is > > accepted, and mail for such host is sitting in the queue until it times out.
On 10.11.10 16:27, Michelle Konzack wrote: > Not right, because courier-mta tell the sender that it does not accept > mail. It will not. Courier-mta _can_ not know that some _remote_ host having A address does not do mail. Even temporary failure connecting to the A can mean the host does send and accept mail but is unreachable now. And even this would require SAV which is often considered abuse. > > That is why some admins want to have way to indicate this kind of mail > > should not be generated not accepted. > > Maybe they should read the courier documentation? Oh yes? So, since now, every mail admin in the world is supposed to read courier documentation, even when using postfix or e.g. microsoft exchange? > > Have you never seen mail destined to a host with A record that does > > not accept mail? > > Yes, my VServers. Why should a VServer which host only Websites (in my > case arround 800 sites per VServer) accept messages? ... > Oh, before I switched to courier-mta on the VServers I used ssmtp which > mean, the MTA does never respond to a SMTP request. Isn't this exacly the same I'm telling already? > The websites have MX records which point to <mail.tamay-dogan.net> and > the VServers runing courier use the MTA only to send status messages or > for Web-Forms. So, you do accept mail for all of your websites? Well, I am not. We are running bunch of virtualhosts at home.nextra.sk, and home.nextra.sk has 2 addresses, neither of them runs SMTP. Actually, nobody should send mail from or to @home.nextra.sk addresses, but since it has A records, all mail servers in the world will probably accept @home.nextra.sk in mail from: or rcpt to: (at least from local) and apparently even deliver the former without any change to know that those addresses do not exist. This is what I want to avoid. And please do not tell me I should point MX somewhere just to get flooded by spam and backscatter (SAV etc). We just do NOT currently have any indication to indicate that some domain names in mail should not be accepted. SPF isn't widely used and even where it is, it's not always configured for mail from: rejection. The "IN MX 0 ." is used on some places and I'd like to have support for it in courier. Yes, it may be optional. > Oh there is another thing: > I have tried the "."in the MX record and the Syntax check for > the zonefiles give a bunch of errors and it seems, that the > "." break DNSSEC at least for bind9 in Debian Lenny/Squeeze. I'd say this is kind of an error, since the . is (afaik) valid DNS name. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [email protected] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Nothing is fool-proof to a talented fool. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Next 800 Companies to Lead America's Growth: New Video Whitepaper David G. Thomson, author of the best-selling book "Blueprint to a Billion" shares his insights and actions to help propel your business during the next growth cycle. Listen Now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/SAP-dev2dev _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
