Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions)

According to internal records here, it was in sendmail 8.10, released
3/1/00.

-Rand

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Hector Santos wrote:

> Great.  Thanks for the feedback.
>
> What sort of 2821.MailFrom validation was PostFIX doing back in 99?
>
> So we have:
>
> Exim SMTP server
> PostFix SMTP server
> WIldcat! SMTP server
>
> all doing MAIL FROM delayed validation.  How about SendMail?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Hector Santos, CTO
> Santronics Software, Inc.
> http://www.santronics.com
> 305-431-2846 Cell
> 305-248-3204 Office
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wietse Venema" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 12:26 PM
> Subject: Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new
> revisions)
>
>
> >
> > Hector Santos:
> > > See RFC 2821 Section 3.3:
> > >
> > > | 3.3 Mail Transactions
> > > |
> > > |    .....
> > > |
> > > |   .............  Despite the apparent
> > > |   scope of this requirement, there are circumstances in which the
> > > |   acceptability of the reverse-path may not be determined until one or
> > > |   more forward-paths (in RCPT commands) can be examined.  In those
> > > |   cases, the server MAY reasonably accept the reverse-path (with a 250
> > > |   reply) and then report problems after the forward-paths are received
> > > |   and examined.  Normally, failures produce 550 or 553 replies.
> > >
> > > This is probably the most powerful concepts in RFC 2821 for anti-spam
> > > operations.  It opens the door for Mail From Validation and it offers
> > > performance enhancement and overhead reductionn.  We are probably among
> the
> > > first, if the the only product in the market to have implemented this
> > > recommendation.
> >
> > The Postfix MTA does this by default since 19990510 (May 10, 1999),
> > according to the day-to-day log.
> >
> >  Wietse
> >
> >
>
>
>