Re: Zmailer SMTP: Anal retentive or correct?

[woods@most.weird.com (Greg A. Woods)]

[ On Fri, July 26, 1996 at 22:58:58 (-0600), James MacKinnon wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Zmailer SMTP: Anal retentive or correct?
>
> I would add that they only need to 'look OK' if you are not the primary
> uucp gateway. If you ARE, then, not only do they need to look OK, but 
> they had better represent reality too, and you have the responsibility of 
> ensuring that the source route is valid - you don't want bounces on 
> yourself back to your uucp hosts for lack of proper uucp support.

Hmmm....  But how to determine this responsibility.  Perhaps if the MX
record you find points at yourself?  I'm assuming in this case we're
talking about looking at addresses in headers and verifying that they
"look OK".  If you're re-writing them into <user@MX-ED.HOST.DOMAIN> then
presumably you'll have some solid assurance that the mx'ed host you're
putting in the header is correct (i.e. it comes from a table you've
manually verified or something).

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 443-1734			VE3TCP			robohack!woods
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>