--On 5 December 2006 15:36:19 -0600 Karl Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Somehow I think my point was missed - the real reason they were blocking
> is  that the sending server doesn't have port 25 open to the public! The
> sending  server was also not the MX server. (The helo was/is just fine -
> they just can't  get it except from our MX listed server). They are not
> doing a callback based  on the MX record, but instead on the sending IP.
> They evidently don't use spf  records either.
>
> I understand why they are doing this - it just is not in the RFCs (yet?).
> In a  way I agree with them - there needs to be some system of
> authentication between  MTA to MTA communications. There really needs to
> be a new standard - I hope it  isn't left to M$ to set it.

Then I guess they must be whitelisting the mail servers of most email 
users. Hotmail, for example, don't have smtp listeners on their sending 
MTAs. Frankly, you've not provided any evidence for what you claim, and I 
think that the fix you put in place had some side effect that fixed the 
real problem.

>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Karl Schmidt                         EMail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Transtronics, Inc.                           WEB http://xtronics.com
> 3209 West 9th Street                    Ph (785) 841-3089
> Lawrence, KS 66049                     FAX (785) 841-0434
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------



-- 
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex

-- 
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users 
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/

Reply via email to