> -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: donderdag 19 oktober 2006 6:40 > To: Mark > Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org > Subject: Re: Scoring PTR's > > > > Yes, a very bad idea. And a mite on the side of RFC ignorance. :) > > > > "mail.apache.org" is the HELO name, supplied by the > > connecting client. This FQDN has to resolve to the connecting > > IP address, 209.237.227.199, which is does. > > Actually, according to RFC 2821 section 4.1.1.1 the EHLO/HELO string > doesn't have to be a FQDN at all,
I didn't say that, did I? I was talking about "mail.apache.org", and then spoke of *this* FQDN. There's no address literal here. > According to that RFC, if there's no meaningful domain name you SHOULD > use an address literal.. but even that that is not a MUST. I didn't say MUST. SHOULD, however, is the imperative word. HELO names SHOULD be a FQDN or an address literal. Also, It is common practice not to fault people over regular words like "should, should not, must, may", unless they are capitalized (indicating RFC 2119 significance). So, I stand by what I said: FQDNs, used in EHLO/HELO definitely should (not SHOULD) resolve to the IP address of the connecting client. The point, however, was, that the connecting IP address definitely does not have to resolve to the HELO name of the connecting client. - Mark
