Qmail
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Qmail is clearly out of compliance with RFC282. [X200611277092]

To: dl@blackpacket.net
Subject: RE: Qmail is clearly out of compliance with RFC282. [X200611277092]
From: "Maintenance Fees Inquiries" <MaintenanceFeesInquiries@USPTO.GOV>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 18:14:54 -0500
Cc: qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: gmail-qmail@securepoint.com
Delivered-to: sp.com.list@gmail.com
Delivered-to: mailing list qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Mailing-list: contact qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to; run by ezmlm
Thread-index: AccSedlD8SBzNj30R4utX8jZuShcuQ==
Thread-topic: Qmail is clearly out of compliance with RFC282. [X200611277092]
Dear Tyler,                                                                     
                                      Thank you for contacting the Maintenance 
Fee Branch.  You should receive a response within 2-3 business days.  The 
tracking number for your inquiry is X200611277092.                              
                                                                                
                                            Maintenance Fee Branch (571) 
272-6500



-----Original Message-----
From: Tyler [mailto:dl@blackpacket.net]
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 6:14 PM
To: Marc Perkel
Cc: qmail@list.cr.yp.to
Subject: Re: Qmail is clearly out of compliance with RFC282.

Marc Perkel wrote:
>  From the other thread, the relevant RFC passage was quoted from RFC2821:
> 
>    To provide reliable mail transmission, the SMTP client MUST be able
>    to try (and retry) each of the relevant addresses in this list in
>    order, until a delivery attempt succeeds.
> 
> 
> Seems clear to me. Unless you want to argue what MUST means.
> 
>    However, there MAY also
>    be a configurable limit on the number of alternate addresses that
>    can be tried.  In any case, the SMTP client SHOULD try at least two
>    addresses.
> 
> What this says is that if you decide to have some limits that the limits 
> should be set at 2 or more. Since Qmail doesn't have a configurable 
> limit then the MUST part applies.
> 
> Clearly it is saying that in any case that at least 2 mx records must 
> best tested. For some reason you are ignoring the plain language of the 
> RFC. It could have been written more precisely but you really have to 
> stretch to not get what it is clearly saying.
> 
> Qmail is out of compliance with RFC282.
> 

I just replied to this in the other thread, I'll reply quickly here:

 >The SMTP client MUST be able to try (and retry) each of the relevant 
addresses in this list in order, until a delivery attempt succeeds.
QMail does have the ability to try and retry each MX, for example, when 
none of the MXes are reachable.

 >There MAY also be a configurable limit on the number of alternate 
addresses that can be tried.
As far as I am aware, this is not configurable in QMail, but is not 
required.

 >In any case, the SMTP client SHOULD try at least two addresses.
This is a recommendation, it does not have to try at least two 
addresses.  So, as long as QMail is ABLE to try and retry according to 
the first sentence, it is in compliance.


Whether you like it or not, QMail is (at least arguably), RFC compliant, 
whereas your spam solution, as I mention in the other thread, is not RFC 
compliant.

Either way, with QMail as one of the top 4 most popular MTAs (arguably 
the 2nd most popular), and used by giants like Yahoo, whether it's RFC 
compliant or not, it's widely used and accepted, and changing every 
install of QMail so it works with your system isn't a feasible option.

Tyler



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • RE: Qmail is clearly out of compliance with RFC282. [X200611277092], Maintenance Fees Inquiries <=