On Thu, 2003-03-27 at 10:55, Nick Harring wrote: > We currently run our hosted systems requiring reverse DNS and haven't > really had any complaints about mail not being received. While there's > no rule requiring reverse DNS, systems without it are much more likely > to be spam originators in my experience with our system. The few > systems I've come across that legitimately send mail but had broken > reverse DNS were more than happy, and able, to fix it quickly and > understood immediately the point of rejecting connections on such a > condition.
If you've chosen to deliberately break your mail server like this, that is of course your choice to make. I just hope you've informed your customers.
Please provide a reference to a requirement that a mailserver must accept mail from sources that do not have reverse DNS in place. For that matter, please provide a reference to a requirement that a mailserver must accept mail, regardless of reason.
It's one thing to say "if you've chosen to deliberately run your mail server like this", it's entirely different to claim that a mailserver is "broken" by running it like this.
Paul Theodoropoulos
http://www.anastrophe.com
http://folding.stanford.edu
The Nicest Misanthrope on the Net
