13.05.2013 09:28, Nikolas Kallis wrote: > Hello, > > > There is a bug in Postfix's 'smtpd_helo_required' option, with the attribute > 'reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname'. > > Postfix does not accept an address literal for a HELO or EHLO message, and > Postfix's documentation says a FQDN is required for a HELO or EHLO.
This is incorrect. Postfix accepts IP literals (either IPv4 or IPv6) in HELO/EHLO argument, and did that since the very beginning 15+ years ago. Some sites may explicitly block such argument using postfix, but it is custom config and not postfix's fault. Claims without facts isn't wise. Maybe at least provide an example. > This is not RFC 2821 states under '4.1.1.1 Extended HELLO (EHLO) or HELLO > (HELO)' that an address literal must be accepted. Sure, and postfix does just that. > Postfix documentation will also need to be updated with the correct > information: > > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_helo_restrictions What exactly needs to be corrected here? What is incorrect? Again, claims without facts isn't wise. Maybe you should tell which statement is incorrect instead of pointing at a whole large paragraph. > Also, my e-mail address was recently removed from the postfix-devel when I > did not request it, nor was I consulted over the decision. Just one opportunity: mailing list manager robot does not ask a bouncing addresses whenever they want to be unsubscribed. > If this happens again then I will cease contributing to Postfix. I think this way it is better not to. Thanks, /mjt
