Re: [mailop] Should mail servers publish IPv6 MX records? Could this harm your spam filtering?

2018-06-11 Thread Stefano Bagnara
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 at 18:14, Stefano Bagnara wrote: > On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 at 17:53, Michael Peddemors wrote: > > [...] > > And while using that as feedback might seem the logical conclusion, in > > the real world we still see more feedback reports from legitimate email > > the customer should have

Re: [mailop] Should mail servers publish IPv6 MX records? Could this harm your spam filtering?

2018-06-11 Thread Bill Cole
On 10 Jun 2018, at 17:26, Al Iverson via mailop wrote: example.net IN MX 0 . Nice. It's been listed in a few best practice documents as well as RFC 7505 for more than a few years. Good to see it getting some traction. I cry a little inside every time I see a null MX, think of the

[mailop] HELO *.*

2018-06-11 Thread Brielle Bruns
Been seeing an awful lot of these lately on one of my email servers (exim based): 2018-06-11 14:15:44 no host name found for IP address 157.25.104.90 2018-06-11 14:15:47 rejected HELO from [157.25.104.90]: syntactically invalid argument(s): *.* 2018-06-11 14:21:42 no host name found for IP ad

Re: [mailop] HELO *.*

2018-06-11 Thread Michael Peddemors
On 18-06-11 01:27 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: Been seeing an awful lot of these lately on one of my email servers (exim based): 2018-06-11 14:15:44 no host name found for IP address 157.25.104.90 2018-06-11 14:15:47 rejected HELO from [157.25.104.90]: syntactically invalid argument(s): *.* 2018

Re: [mailop] HELO *.*

2018-06-11 Thread Michael Wise via mailop
Back in the day ... I'd be inclined to not accept mail from something HELOing with an IP literal where the connecting IP was not on our local network. An excuse can be made for a mail client. An actual mail server doing this doesn't belong on the Internet until they buy a clue. IMHO only, of c

Re: [mailop] HELO *.*

2018-06-11 Thread Brielle Bruns
On 6/11/2018 4:23 PM, Michael Wise via mailop wrote: Back in the day ... I'd be inclined to not accept mail from something HELOing with an IP literal where the connecting IP was not on our local network. An excuse can be made for a mail client. An actual mail server doing this doesn't belong o

Re: [mailop] HELO *.*

2018-06-11 Thread Eric Tykwinski
I still see a lot of helo *.local which is supposed to be a multicast address, and sadly was the MS way. Not complaining to Michael directly as that was long embedded. Sincerely, Eric Tykwinski TrueNet, Inc. P: 610-429-8300 > On Jun 11, 2018, at 7:21 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: > > On 6/11/2018

Re: [mailop] HELO *.*

2018-06-11 Thread Dave Warren
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, at 13:27, Brielle Bruns wrote: > Been seeing an awful lot of these lately on one of my email servers > (exim based): > > > 2018-06-11 14:15:44 no host name found for IP address 157.25.104.90 > 2018-06-11 14:15:47 rejected HELO from [157.25.104.90]: syntactically > invalid

Re: [mailop] HELO *.*

2018-06-11 Thread Michael Peddemors
On 18-06-11 05:05 PM, Dave Warren wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, at 13:27, Brielle Bruns wrote: Been seeing an awful lot of these lately on one of my email servers (exim based): 2018-06-11 14:15:44 no host name found for IP address 157.25.104.90 2018-06-11 14:15:47 rejected HELO from [157.25.104

Re: [mailop] HELO *.*

2018-06-11 Thread Bill Cole
On 11 Jun 2018, at 20:05 (-0400), Dave Warren wrote: On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, at 13:27, Brielle Bruns wrote: Been seeing an awful lot of these lately on one of my email servers (exim based): 2018-06-11 14:15:44 no host name found for IP address 157.25.104.90 2018-06-11 14:15:47 rejected HELO fro