[SpamCop-List] Re: ATTN Deputies: Spamcop in RFC-Ignorant
nobody at spamcop.net
Wed Aug 11 16:20:17 EDT 2004
"Paul Johnson" <baloo at ursine.ca> wrote in message
news:87fz6tipt6.fsf at ursine.ca...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Why not fix it, since postmaster is mandatory and abuse is recommended?
There is nothing to fix; the postmaster address works. If you write to
postmaster you get an email back. RFC 2821 section 4.5.1 says:
"Any system that includes an SMTP server supporting mail relaying or
delivery MUST support the reserved mailbox "postmaster" as a case-
insensitive local name. This postmaster address is not strictly
necessary if the server always returns 554 on connection opening (as
described in section 3.1). The requirement to accept mail for
postmaster implies that RCPT commands which specify a mailbox for
postmaster at any of the domains for which the SMTP server provides
mail service, as well as the special case of "RCPT TO:<Postmaster>"
(with no domain specification), MUST be supported.
SMTP systems are expected to make every reasonable effort to accept
mail directed to Postmaster from any other system on the Internet.
In extreme cases --such as to contain a denial of service attack or
other breach of security-- an SMTP server may block mail directed to
Postmaster. However, such arrangements SHOULD be narrowly tailored
so as to avoid blocking messages which are not part of such attacks"
And to the best of my knowledge we are consistent with those requirements.
But I did say I was not going to argue about RFCi and it seems that I am
veering that way so I shall shut up on this subject now.
More information about the SpamCop-List