> > Should qmail be backing off? Is accepting+dropping connections
> > documentably wrong, that I should complain to them about
> > it? What's the deal?
>
> Yes, it's wrong. Why are they advertising an MX if they never intend
> to allow connections to it?
It looks like my firewall is the one "accepting" and then dropping
connections; the remote primary MXs simply refuse connection, so if the
firewall isn't in place it works fine.
Xerox, and some other sites I've seen, use MX records to make mail
routing administration easier. The mail store machine is the top priority,
but only Xerox machines can reach it. All internet hosts fail to reach it
and must back off to the Internet-accessible corporate mail relays. By
controlling this via DNS, control over mail delivery is in the hands of the
individual organization rather than having a central mail authority need to
know about every server in the company.
It's arguably unfriendly and arguably stupid, but I've never seen an
argument that claimed it wasn't legal. Two other sites which seem to be
doing it are snet.net and viewlogic.com.
--
gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
