Yeah, Microsoft does send out emails from passport.com with return addresses like PPMSVCMG(a)PASSPORT.COM even though there are no MX records for the domain. Just found a bunch of undeliverable bounces to passport.com stuck in a mail queue... -- Juha Saarinen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
At 12:49 13/06/02 +1200, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Yeah, Microsoft does send out emails from passport.com with return addresses like PPMSVCMG(a)PASSPORT.COM even though there are no MX records for the domain.
Just found a bunch of undeliverable bounces to passport.com stuck in a mail queue...
I see it too - the exact same address. Has anyone tried contacting them about it ? (Ha :) Regards, Simon - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Yeah, Microsoft does send out emails from passport.com with return addresses like PPMSVCMG(a)PASSPORT.COM even though there are no MX records for the domain.
Unless RFC 974 has been superceeded : It is possible that the list of MXs in the response to the query will be empty. This is a special case. If the list is empty, mailers should treat it as if it contained one RR, an MX RR with a preference value of 0, and a host name of REMOTE. (I.e., REMOTE is its only MX). In addition, the mailer should do no further processing on the list, but should attempt to deliver the message to REMOTE. The idea here is that if a domain fails to advertise any information about a particular name we will give it the benefit of the doubt and attempt delivery. --David Robb - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, David Robb wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Yeah, Microsoft does send out emails from passport.com with return addresses like PPMSVCMG(a)PASSPORT.COM even though there are no MX records for the domain.
Unless RFC 974 has been superceeded :
It is possible that the list of MXs in the response to the query will be empty. This is a special case. If the list is empty, mailers should treat it as if it contained one RR, an MX RR with a preference value of 0, and a host name of REMOTE. (I.e., REMOTE is its only MX). In addition, the mailer should do no further processing on the list, but should attempt to deliver the message to REMOTE. The idea here is that if a domain fails to advertise any information about a particular name we will give it the benefit of the doubt and attempt delivery.
It has been, according to my copy of rfc-index.txt; this is now covered in RFC 2821, section 5: ---------- Cut Here ---------- The lookup first attempts to locate an MX record associated with the name. If a CNAME record is found instead, the resulting name is processed as if it were the initial name. If no MX records are found, but an A RR is found, the A RR is treated as if it was associated with an implicit MX RR, with a preference of 0, pointing to that host. ---------- Cut Here ---------- The problem is that passport.com has no MX records, and the A for it doesn't accept SMTP connections (but they insist on sending out mail with @passport.com envelope senders, as has been noted here). Cheers R -- Richard Stevenson Systems Specialist Xtra Limited - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Richard Stevenson wrote:
It has been, according to my copy of rfc-index.txt; this is now covered in RFC 2821, section 5:
<nod> I didn't have a handy current rfc index, and google provided me with RFC 974 :)
---------- Cut Here ---------- The lookup first attempts to locate an MX record associated with the name. If a CNAME record is found instead, the resulting name is processed as if it were the initial name. If no MX records are found, but an A RR is found, the A RR is treated as if it was associated with an implicit MX RR, with a preference of 0, pointing to that host. ---------- Cut Here ----------
The problem is that passport.com has no MX records, and the A for it doesn't accept SMTP connections (but they insist on sending out mail with @passport.com envelope senders, as has been noted here).
I'm guess I'm just being pedantic about peoples comments that it doesn't have any MX records, and pointing out that it's not strictly necessary. :) IMHO they probably should be accepting SMTP connections, so they can collect and deal with bounces, but for whatever reason they've chosen not to. --David - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, David Robb wrote:
Unless RFC 974 has been superceeded :
It is possible that the list of MXs in the response to the query will be empty. This is a special case. If the list is empty, mailers should treat it as if it contained one RR, an MX RR with a preference value of 0, and a host name of REMOTE. (I.e., REMOTE is its only MX). In addition, the mailer should do no further processing on the list, but should attempt to deliver the message to REMOTE. The idea here is that if a domain fails to advertise any information about a particular name we will give it the benefit of the doubt and attempt delivery.
# mail -v ppmsvcmg(a)passport.com Subject: tst . Cc: Null message body; hope that's ok LOG: MAIN <= juha(a)saarinen.org U=beep P=local S=304 Connecting to passport.com [207.68.183.187]:25 ... That's the A record for passport.com, so it looks like my MTA is somewhat RFC compliant. -- Juha Saarinen - To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog
participants (4)
-
David Robb -
Juha Saarinen -
Richard Stevenson -
Simon Byrnand