On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 07:33:28AM +0800, Corey Hickman via Postfix-users wrote:
> reject_invalid_helo_hostname > reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname > > what are the differences between them? does the second one hold the > first one already? Neither subsumes the other, perhaps due to an implementation oversight. The first excludes bad hostname syntax, *and* (correctly I believe, since EHLO precedes the announcement of SMTPUTF8 support) disallows UTF8 names. The second excludes bad syntax, requires at least one "." in the name, but doesn't disallow UTF8. > Intuitively, you might think that reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname is > MORE restrictive than reject_invalid_helo_hostname, but in fact > reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname is LESS restrictive than > reject_invalid_helo_hostname. Differently restrictive, but likely unintentionally. On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 09:49:47AM +0800, Ken Peng via Postfix-users wrote: > I agree with you. for instance, 腾讯.公司 is a invalid hostname, but > it is a fqdn hostname which will pass the check by the second clause. It is a valid UTF8 hostname in a context where UTF8 is allowed, but the EHLO command isn't such a context. -- Viktor. _______________________________________________ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org