On 1/12/2010 3:19 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
On January 12, 2010 2:52:58 PM -0600 Stan Hoeppner
<s...@hardwarefreak.com> wrote:
Frank Cusack put forth on 1/12/2010 2:29 PM:
Is it your opinion that the disadvantages I've described aren't valid?
When it comes to multiple PTRs on a single email emitting IP, yes, it is
my opinion that that the disadvantages you describe are not valid. As a
matter of fact, I don't know of a scenario that would *require* an email
emitting IP to have multiple PTRs. Can you post such a scenario?
I can't think of a scenario for ANY type of server that would *require*
multiple PTR records. Not that they are infallible, but certainly
neither did the presumably smarter-than-any-of-us guys that designed
the new IPv6-friendlier getXXXXinfo() interfaces.
But I also can't think of a reason to not handle it.
-frank
Postfix supports clients with multiple PTR records just fine.
It does not crash, disconnect, error, or in any other way
not handle them.
Postfix does not do insane things such as walk through all the
PTRs looking for one that's not "unknown", nor does postfix
enumerate all possible hostnames for access table lookups.
Test your system library handling of the client as suggested
earlier. I fully expect it to work just fine. Assuming it
does work just fine, the problem is the client, not the PTR
records.
I'm quite confidant the the multiple PTR issue is a red
herring for a client that's broken in some other way.
Everyone else seems to be able to receive mail from such
clients just fine.
-- Noel Jones
