[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2821bis ABNF diff

2005-09-09 15:19:59

Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:

Seems to me "HELO xyyzz" has to result in a 501 error.

Yes... but better don't try this if you're my MSA ;-)
"Fix all MUAs" is something for later, not 2821(bis).

Actually my MUA isn't broken, it only has some peculiar
ideas like "everybody has a (mail) domain" deriving
stuff like MAIL FROM, HELO, Message-ID, etc. from these

IIRC I could convince it to use, but
that had undesirable side effects elsewhere.  And using also didn't work in some cases, so
finally I gave up using "TLD" .invalid as default where
some piece of software insists on a domain.

Maybe I should try it again, the first of the 37 lines
in what passes as /etc/hosts on my box is a candidate,
but as far as 2821(bis) is concerned ignorant MUAs - or
their ignorant users - are a hopeless case.

For Tony's problem, one third of "legitimate" MTAs, it's
different, 2821(bis) should be adamant that these MTAs
are anything but "legitimate".

And in fact there is an "updates 1123" in 2821, and that
will be also the case for 2821bis.  Nobody proposes that
Tony's MTAs "must" refuse to talk with these broken MTAs.

But if somebody else tries this approach we want him to
have the better arguments in a flamewar based on 2821bis.

A "no-nonsense EHLO (HELO)" is a major point for ideas
like CSV / SIQ / SPF / etc.  The core document 2821bis
has to be clear about this issue, even if that's still
wishful thinking to a certain degree (= Tony's 1/3).

                      Bye, Frank

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>