On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 01:04:56PM -0500, Frank Cusack wrote:
> On January 12, 2010 12:24:20 PM -0500 Frank Cusack <fcus...@fcusack.com>
> wrote:
>> Apparently it only "honors" the first PTR record that getnameinfo()
>> returns to it. Additionally this appears to be a conscious decision
>> and in part designed to impose postfix's sense of order on the world.
>
> Well, I see part of the problem which is that if postfix does use
> getnameinfo(), it can only get 1 of the PTR records. The supposedly
> superior getnameinfo() can only return a single entry.
>
> On January 12, 2010 11:53:15 AM -0600 Robert Fournerat <rob...@netin.com>
> wrote:
>> In this case at least, I think, "postfix's sense of order on the
>> world" is correct. Thank you Wietse (et al) for doing this.
>
> Thank you for making my life hell!
>
> Postfix's sense of order may be philosophically correct, but it is not
> consistent with the RFCs, so postfix is wrong. It is also counter
> to the well established design philosophy, be liberal in what you accept.
THIS THREAD IS CLOSED.
If you have a specific use case in which you need guidance to configure
Postfix, please start a new thread, without the polemics.
If you just want to vent, please do it somewhere else.
--
Viktor.
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.
To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
<mailto:majord...@postfix.org?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users>
If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.
