DragonFly kernel List (threaded) for 2008-02
Re: sendmail 8.14 has a serious memory corruption bug in it
Matthew Dillon wrote:
I beg to differ ...
Yes - not being willing  AND able to *get* a PTR RR is one issue .
But criticising an MTA admin (your server...) - especially in this day
and age - for not accepting traffic for lack of valid DNS (in general)
and PTR RR in particular, I quote:
Uh, Bill, I think you are misinterpreting the thread. He's simply saying
that PacBell won't assign reverse DNS for his IP. It has nothing to do
with RFC's, sendmail, or anything else.
>> "If someone rejects mails based on some local rules, then he might
>> not receive a reply..."
. .. and not being inherently aware that this is no mere 'local rule' but
RFC AND BCP,
. .. is head-up-and-locked behaviour from the general public - and badly
in need of enlightenment in the case of anyone involved in devel of what
remains the most heavily-used MTA on the planet (sendmail).
Sendmail CAN and generally DOES do the right thing - when configured by
those 'aware' - and the sendmail docs show the way.
Otherwise, bitching that a(ny) mailadmin should let down essential
guards is simply no longer an option. Too many WinCrobes, too little
and this is all old-hat on various MTA mailing lists, deosn't really
belong here 'atall'.
 Lest we forget, it was this very same rejection - from *your* server
in fact, that caused me a year or three ago to get off my own lazy
backside, send an e-mail, follow-up by phone...
. . and get a PTR RR into place for *my* MTA in just about five
OTOH, we did/do have the appropriate grade of service contract - a full
rack in a data center with 24x7 admin staff on-site.
 Or using the ISP's host when you cannot get what you know you need.