Am 08.05.2013 01:41, schrieb Vincent Lefevre: > On 2013-05-07 17:36:49 -0500, /dev/rob0 wrote: >> I'm going to take this chance to pipe into this thread that I am >> confused about Vincent's issue. He says that the client which lacked >> PTR (the one run by a Debianista) was not a mail exchanger, or not >> exchanging mail. >> >> Why, then, would reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname be an issue? >> Obviously one must never apply this against one's own submitting >> users. Or was Vincent confused about the distinction between mail >> exchanging clients and submission clients? > > I'm not sure about your terminology. When I hear "mail exchanger", > I think about "MX" and a machine pointed to by a MX record. At > least this is what I get when searching for "mail exchanger" on > Google
yes MX in case of sending MTA is irrelevant but as explained you need a PTR on a MTA which wants to deliver mail to another server or you have to expect that you mail is rejetced it is perfectly safe to call anybody who wants deliver mails to you without having a valid PTR on his machine a foll and rehect his message and if he complains simply recommend him to let the job do someone else with more qualification period
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
