At 07:05 12-04-2008, Hector Santos wrote:
It may also raise the question when the "World's largest ESP" and a
growing amount of other ESPs/ISP mail receivers forcing this PTR
record, should be 'Highlighted' in 2821bis.
RFC 2821bis is not about what the "world's largest ESP" does. It
does not highlight current practice because such practices can change
I mean, there are some who believe the MX is required for security
reasons. Well, why not PTR?
I gather that you mean abuse reasons instead of security reasons.
Its stupid I think and x821 always allowed PTR checking as an
option, but it was so unreliable, it wasn't a real issue and hardly
used in my experience.
The RFC allows local policy. It's up to the site to determine
whether the policy is reliable or not.
But I am at a point now where I'm no longer sure what make sense any
more or that it really matter any more. What pisses me off is this
new growing behavior is pushing the support burden on smaller
vendors and people like myself and brother.
That's unfortunately how things are. I could point out that a lot of
people, including the author of this message, argued for proposals
that can cause such a burden.
I guess there is also some selfishness here because as with most
things, if it doesn't happen to you, if you don't feel it, most
people who careless about it.