SLUG Mailing List Archives
Re: [SLUG] sendmail banning no reverse dns
- To: David Fitch <davidf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [SLUG] sendmail banning no reverse dns
- From: David <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu Dec 5 16:10:02 2002
- Cc: slug@xxxxxxxxxxx
I don't think it's off topic either.. i've been following closely
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, David Fitch wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 01:26:47PM +1100, Tony Green wrote:
> > On Thu, 2002-12-05 at 13:21, David Fitch wrote:
> > > you could argue that it's not a "legimate mail server"
> > > if it doesn't reverse resolve.
> > > Are there valid reasons why they wouldn't reverse resolve?
> > What if you house your machines at a co-lo site? You're allocated an IP
> > and you can't control the reverse mapping of it. Does that mean that
> > you don't have a 'legimate mail server'?
> you might not be able to control the reverse mapping but it
> should still map to something - which is good enough.
> Are there co-lo places where the IP doesn't reverse map to
> anything? and if so, why? (apart from incompetence
> or cluelessness)
> > We're getting off-topic and should take this to -chat
> I'm not on slug-chat, and besides I don't think it's OT.
> SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
> More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug