If you are sending direct SMTP on behalf of your domain from essentially random locations, how are we supposed to pick you out from spammers that do the same?

Use your MX or SPF senders as your outbound mail agent, especially if they are properly configured with full DNS records so we can tell they are the correct machines to be sending on your behalf, or expect that you will get more mail bounced and lost than the average user because you are being unpredictable and unverifiable.

On 09/04/2012 11:05 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Peach" <john-na...@johnpeach.com>
On Tue, 4 Sep 2012 11:57:38 -0400 (EDT)
Jay Ashworth <j...@baylink.com> wrote:
SMTP Auth to *arbitrary remote domains' MX servers*? Am I missing
something,
or are you?
I run an MTA on my server and auth to that from laptops and other
clients. Relaying allowed for authorised users.
So, in other words, it's ok to rant and stomp our feet about the end-to-end
architecture and how critical it is to support in order to diss NAT, but
we're required to ignore it when discussing SMTP?

I'm not sure I'm following, there.

Cheers,
-- jra

--
Daniel Taylor             VP Operations       Vocal Laboratories, Inc
dtay...@vocalabs.com                                 952-941-6580x203


Reply via email to