Re: Zmailer SMTP: Anal retentive or correct?

[Aarnio Matti <mea@utu.fi>]

> We have a few sites that get mail via UUCP, typically the uucp name is
> foo and the domain name is foo.com or foo.org. Recently I've noticed
> that some smtp receivers have been rejecting mail from these sites
> because the name is not fully qualified. I grumbled, because I assumed
> it was another revision to the ever imperfect sendmail.

	Message transport envelope origins should always be
	in FQDN, if they are not, receiving system is IMO
	qualified to complain.  I don't do it, because at
	utu.fi there are systems using our mailhost as blinding
	hub --  uname@host --> uname@utu.fi

> However, tonight I had occasion to try to manually send one of these
> pieces of mail (to parc.xerox.com), and guess what, it's a zmailer
> site.

   Was it like this ?
	<-- MAIL FROM:<foo@foo>
	--> 553 Bad FROM address ...

   Now presume the sender hostname to be:
	polaris
   At  utu.fi  there is an old server with that same name,
if we receive email from outside claiming origins from:
	user@polaris
are we right to assume it to be   user@polaris.utu.fi  ?


> I can't believe this is the correct behavior - has this been added to
> zmailer recently - our smtpserver certianly has *never* done this!

	The PARC server uses extremely conservative approach,
	their server is way old (and stable..).  It also has
	some local changes.

> In any case, is there something I can do here as a hack to fix this
> problem? My success rate in getting over worked admins to change what
> looks like a working config to them is less than nil...

	Perhaps a bit education to the UUCP feeders ?
	The UUCP is fine for store & forward, however its
	use does not mandate the use of UUCP names for
	the message origination.

	In fact the only UUCP link I have experience with
	does use FQDN for the source, and destination
	addresses, while using UUCP link names for the
	store & forward service.

> Thanks...
> sdb
> -- 
> sdb@ssr.com

	/Matti Aarnio <mea@utu.fi> <mea@nic.funet.fi>