On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 02:31:14AM +0100, Ángel via mailop wrote:
> E.g. your email arrives to the on-premises MTA, which not finding a
> local user passes it to Office 365 who doesn't have that either so it
> is sent again to on-pre
But this is a real mail loop. One system needs to be authoritat
According to à ngel via mailop :
>On 2022-03-10 at 15:28 -0500, John Levine via mailop wrote:
>> If you really want to stop mail loops, use a Delivered-To header like
>> qmail, Postfix, and Courier do:
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-duklev-deliveredto/
>
>You still need to stop at *s
On 2022-03-10 at 15:28 -0500, John Levine via mailop wrote:
> If you really want to stop mail loops, use a Delivered-To header like
> qmail, Postfix, and Courier do:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-duklev-deliveredto/
You still need to stop at *some* hop-count. This approach stops
deli
It appears that Sebastian Nielsen via mailop said:
>Reason to have a hop limit is to prevent infinite loops where 2 email
>addresses or servers point on each other.
>
>So its not good to set a hop limit too high either, without any compensating
>controls, like having a high hop limit, but cease
On 3/9/22 11:06 PM, Sebastian Nielsen via mailop wrote:
Reason to have a hop limit is to prevent infinite loops where 2 email
addresses or servers point on each other.
I'm quite well aware of that and think that such a protection is a good
thing.
So its not good to set a hop limit too high e
ah, we also used 50 for ARC as a "maximum" hop count:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8617#section-4.2.1
Brandon
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 5:05 PM Brandon Long wrote:
> Ours was set to 50 years ago, and we renamed our internal hops to
> X-Received to avoid issues with external receivers w
Reason to have a hop limit is to prevent infinite loops where 2 email addresses
or servers point on each other.
So its not good to set a hop limit too high either, without any compensating
controls, like having a high hop limit, but cease delivery if it for example
stumbles upon 2 received line
On 3/9/22 4:56 PM, Kelsey Cummings via mailop wrote:
Greetings, we've been seeing some issues in our mail infrastructure with
regular users hitting >25 hops on messages and I'm wondering if there's
a general consensus that the old default of 25 is too low given modern
mail flows.
If I can rid
Remember, those limits were set in a 286/1200 baud world, but a sane limit
should still be observed, 30-50 hops is plenty
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 17:05:38 -0800
Brandon Long via mailop wrote:
> Ours was set to 50 years ago, and we renamed our internal hops to
> X-Received to avoid issues with externa
Ours was set to 50 years ago, and we renamed our internal hops to
X-Received to avoid issues with external receivers with stricter limits.
The number of hops for most consumer mail isn't high, but enterprise
messages can have some really extended hops if it goes through nested
mailing lists and mu
On 3/9/2022 5:05 PM, Brandon Long wrote:
Ours was set to 50 years ago, and we renamed our internal hops to
X-Received to avoid issues with external receivers with stricter limits.
The number of hops for most consumer mail isn't high, but enterprise
messages can have some really extended hops i
Greetings, we've been seeing some issues in our mail infrastructure with
regular users hitting >25 hops on messages and I'm wondering if there's
a general consensus that the old default of 25 is too low given modern
mail flows.
Have any of you had to increase it? Any one know what major ESP's
12 matches
Mail list logo
