On Sun, 2020-06-07 at 20:36 -0600, @lbutlr wrote: > On 07 Jun 2020, at 06:38, yuv <post...@sfina.com> wrote: > > Is there a valid reason for a sender not to fix something so > > essential as DNS configuration? > > That’s not the question.
Oh, yes it is. Making room for degraded configurations is detrimental to the protocol and to the federation of internet email server operators if internet email is ever to mature into a reliable messaging system on par with snailmail. > The question is, do you want to receive the mail or not? If you do, > then don’t use reject_unknown_helo_hostname > > It’s a question only you can answer, but it seems most admins find > that this results in too much lost mail. The consequence of this narrow framing is that internet email is serving the interest of spammers more than the interest of recipients. Spammers pay admins better than recipients, so we get what we pay for. Meanwhile, alternative messaging systems with more rigid controls, some of which are proprietary, achieve maturity much faster. Some of them achieve scale as well. At some point, the cost/benefit analysis of maintaining internet email vs. using alternatives such as SMS will tilt obviously against email, and that's where "most admins" will regret their narrow view. -- Yuval Levy, JD, MBA, CFA Ontario-licensed lawyer
