John Peach:
> On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:18:52 +0200
> Robin Smidsr__d <ro...@smidsrod.no> wrote:
> [snip]
> > Willy De la Court wrote:
> >
> >
> > Does this mean that all of the reject rules are in fact not
> > RFC-conformant?
> >
> > The reason I mention reject_invalid_helo_hostname is that I'm unsure
> > if the IPv(4|6) address syntax is part of this rule (postfix version
> > 2.5.5, distributed with ubuntu 9.04).
> >
> > What about the two other reject rules? As far as I can tell, they are
> > both non-conformant.
>
> Your server, your rules.
Indeed. RFCs are relevant only when parties want to interoperate.
Generally, there is no such desire on the receiving end of SPAM.
Wietse
