[RFCI-Discuss] Rejected <> evidence

[Winston L. Sorfleet]

wls:78 >telnet mail.psychoanalysis.net 25
 
Trying 216.95.181.251...
Connected to mail.psychoanalysis.net.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 mail.psychoanalysis.net FirstClass ESMTP Mail Server v7.0 ready
ehlo romanus.ca
250-mail.psychoanalysis.net Hello romanus.ca (216.187.107.8), pleased to meet you
250-PIPELINING
250-AUTH=CRAM-MD5 LOGIN PLAIN
250-AUTH CRAM-MD5 LOGIN PLAIN
250 8BITMIME
mail from:<>
250 mailer-daemon... Sender ok

Looks like it's just you.  But even my romanus.ocunix.on.ca ehlo works,
so at least it's not because they're using the rfci list.


On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 08:22:59AM -0400, John A. Martin wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Why is the following evidence rejected?
> 
> ,----
> | $ telnet mail.psychoanalysis.net 25
> | Trying 216.95.181.251...
> | Connected to mail.psychoanalysis.net.
> | Escape character is '^]'.
> | 220 mail.psychoanalysis.net FirstClass ESMTP Mail Server v7.0 ready
> | ehlo venice.essential.org
> | 250-mail.psychoanalysis.net Hello venice.essential.org (65.222.222.36), pleased to meet you
> | 250-PIPELINING
> | 250-AUTH=CRAM-MD5 LOGIN PLAIN
> | 250-AUTH CRAM-MD5 LOGIN PLAIN
> | 250 8BITMIME
> | mail from:<>
> | 550 Sorry, your site is blocked from connecting to us
> | Connection closed by foreign host.
> `----
> 
> The policy states
> 
> 	Generally, sending MAIL FROM <> and RCPT TO
> 	<postmaster@example.tld> is a good test case,
> 
> In the above telnet transcript the offending host did not even wait
> for the RCPT TO.  How can that not qualify for the nomination?
> 
> Also, postmaster and abuse nominations are pending for the
> same site.  They return the same 550 stating simply "your site is
> blocked" but give no clue whatsoever as to the reason why.  How come
> such an uninformative response is not regarded as insufficiently
> specific to meet the "narrowly tailered" requirement in the policy?
> 
> ,----
> | After careful consideration, there seemed to be a consensus among
> | users that use of blacklists, etc., did not meet the "narrowly
> | tailored" requirements for blocking mail to postmaster, but that it
> | would be undesirable to list sites simply for employing the MAPS RBL
> | and such on their postmaster address. It was decided that we
> | wouldn't list folks if the rejection message for postmaster seemed
> | to indicate the reason for denial ("{ip} rejected as listed on the
> | MAPS RBL", etc.)
> `----
> 
> While that policy applies specifically to postmaster rather than to
> abuse does it not seem that the abuse address should also be nominated
> fro such a vague response especially when postmaster also does the
> same?
> 
> The result of all three of these nominations is, as seen by one site,
> to make psychoanalysis.net inexplicably and totally unreachable
> through the mail system without recourse to other services.
> 
> 	jam
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAj2z8Z4ACgkQUEvv1b/iXy/4vgCcCqO4XHAXEhpo2A5sHI5Kkbn2
> Sj0AnRduW2mz02nJ4CXxe+vzQlVLVw7S
> =I0na
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> RFCI-Discuss mailing list
> RFCI-Discuss@lists.megacity.org
> http://lists.megacity.org/mailman/listinfo/rfci-discuss

-- 
Winston L. Sorfleet	romanus.ca!wls	
Pgp public key: http://www.romanus.ca/gpg