> I would expect some resistance to this from the IETF. RFRC-5321 (see
> below) seems to say that the name has to be specific to one client
> machine. I have also heard some discussion (I can't recall where),
> in which a large ESP was criticized for putting only its domain name
> in the HELO command.
It's blatantly inappropriate to use the base domain as the HELO unless
there is a corresponding A record that points back to the
transmitters's IP (and the PTR for that IP matches the HELO). That is,
this setup is only useful for SMB shops that have a single machine
serving as webserver and mailserver.
Regardless of how many receivers enforce it, any divergence from the
PTR-HELO-A "roundtrip" should not be encouraged.
--Sandy
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
> below) seems to say that the name has to be specific to one client
> machine. I have also heard some discussion (I can't recall where),
> in which a large ESP was criticized for putting only its domain name
> in the HELO command.
It's blatantly inappropriate to use the base domain as the HELO unless
there is a corresponding A record that points back to the
transmitters's IP (and the PTR for that IP matches the HELO). That is,
this setup is only useful for SMB shops that have a single machine
serving as webserver and mailserver.
Regardless of how many receivers enforce it, any divergence from the
PTR-HELO-A "roundtrip" should not be encouraged.
--Sandy
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com