From: "Hamish Marson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Duncan Hill wrote:
On Monday 07 August 2006 00:02, QQQQ wrote:
| 2250 0733.com
Here are my numbers from last week:
5006 0451.com 3845 53.com
Not seeing anywhere near as high, but this is only on my personal
server: 44 0733.com 34 0451.com 11 0668.com 4 023.com
2 08.com 2 020.com 1 212.com 1 07770500.com 1
01191.com 1 004.com
However, the majority are already being rejected with my standard
rules in Postfix (like don't accept mail from certain netblocks).
I would have sworn there used to be a domain registration rule that
said pure-numeric domains were illegal, but I'm not sure.
The RFC's actually state that a domain MUST start with a letter, and
be any letter or digit or hyphen after. So according to the RFC's
purely numberic domains are illegal.
(e.g. From RFC 1035)
<domain> ::= <subdomain> | " "
<subdomain> ::= <label> | <subdomain> "." <label>
<label> ::= <letter> [ [ <ldh-str> ] <let-dig> ]
<ldh-str> ::= <let-dig-hyp> | <let-dig-hyp> <ldh-str>
<let-dig-hyp> ::= <let-dig> | "-"
<let-dig> ::= <letter> | <digit>
<letter> ::= any one of the 52 alphabetic characters A through Z in
upper case and a through z in lower case
<digit> ::= any one of the ten digits 0 through 9
Seems clear to me... And since RFC1035 is still current, I'm not sure why
purely numeric domains are considered acceptable. (Apart from I can't
think
of a really good reason apart from pedanticness to stop them).
Well, some browsers allow you to put in "google" for the address and
will self-complete to what it thinks you wants. If there is a number
only in there the browser will likely try to interpret the number
as an 32 IP address in decimal form.
All those addresses would hit network 0, though. And that is a reserved
net number.
{^_-}
