Mailing List CGatePro@mail.stalker.com Message #106016
From: Terrence Koeman <terrence@darkness-reigns.com>
Subject: RE: cox.net being rejected redux
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 19:26:02 +0100
To: 'CommuniGate Pro Discussions' <CGatePro@mail.stalker.com>
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CommuniGate Pro Discussions [mailto:CGatePro@mail.stalker.com] On
> Behalf Of James Moe
> Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 6:41 PM
>
> On 03/09/2016 08:03 AM, James Roman wrote:
> > 10:01:00.885 4 SMTPI-002041([72.208.72.31]) rsp: 250-sma-inc.us
> > 250-sma-inc.us your name is not [10.0.1.20] ...
> >
>   The usual response is "250-sma-inc.us we trust you [10.0.1.20]". Why
> would CGP respond with "your names is not [10.0.1.20]"? And, apparently,
> the MUA is offended by that.

It's pretty usual for MTA's to complain about the identification in HELO or EHLO not being correct (no fqdn, RFC1918 IP as in this case, PTR doesn't match name, etc.). On the global internet, "[10.0.1.20]" is, in fact, not a client's name.

But in any case the text after the 250 code shouldn't matter at all. From RFC 5321 (4.2): "The number is for use by automata to determine what state to enter next; the text is for the human user.", with given exceptions being response codes 220, 221, 251, 421, and 551.

--
Regards,
    Terrence Koeman, PhD/MTh/BPsy
          Darkness Reigns (Holding) B.V.

Please quote relevant replies.
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster