John, My main concern is the simple fact that rfcignorant.org is gaining in popularity (I do not use them, but I am watching them!). I am personally not aware of rejected email due to X1 here, 'YET'!
All it takes is for some large ISP or some blacklist to decide that Imail is (ignoring the fact that it is or is not...) in violation and adds it to the blacklist. Then we all have a big problem on our hands and Ipswitch will be flooded with angry Imail owners wanting it fixed yesterday! Something none of us want. FQDN is a criteria for accepting or rejecting a server connection. And if X1 is going to cause problems, then it needs to be changed. I think the suggestion to move the flag somewhere else is an excellent one providing it really has a valid reason to exist in the first place. If not, toss the sucker! Sheldon Sheldon Koehler, Owner/Partner http://www.tenforward.com Ten Forward Communications 360-457-9023 Nationwide access with neighborhood support! "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect." Mark Twain ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Korsak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 3:57 PM Subject: Re: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] IMail's "X1" RFC violation > Since there have been a couple of messages I'm rolling all the answers into > one message. I hope it works, it is easier than writing a bunch of > responses. > > I did not say Ipswitch would not change the response. I do know that in the > past we have put options in the product that allow our customers to violate > RFCs if they want (refuse NULL sender for example). We could talk about > whether the X1 does or does not violate the RFC but I would rather talk > about the problem and find a solution. My goal is not to ignore the > question but to address the problem in the most efficient manner. > > Ipswitch receives many requests for updates, tweaks, enhancements. What > will help me assess the impact is to know what problem is caused by IMail > Server returning X1 as the first two characters and the frequency. If this > was causing 20% of all message to be rejected then we have a very serious > problem, regardless of what the RFC says. > > Based on Sheldon's response below I take that the concern is that some > servers will take this as a violation and drop the connection or reject the > message. So, now we are left with each party believing they are correctly > interpreting the RFC, which is generally not very useful to you, our users. > How often does the problem happen? What servers are responsible for the > behavior? Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html to be removed from this list. An Archive of this list is available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Please visit the Knowledge Base for answers to frequently asked questions: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
