Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Better to do 550 instead of 450 for these?

Expand Messages
  • Roger B.A. Klorese
    ... No, it s not. Someone s DNS servers may be down for a bit -- that s why a 4xx is used.
    Message 1 of 13 , Dec 31, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      CN wrote:
      > a.com is one of my virtual domains. I get a slew of these in the log, with various_names@....
      >
      > Is it better to do a 550 reject on these?


      No, it's not. Someone's DNS servers may be down for a bit -- that's why
      a 4xx is used.
    • Victor Duchovni
      ... Postfix never returns 5XX for temporary lookup problems, even when it returns 5XX for NXDOMAIN and other hard failures. Setting the various reject codes to
      Message 2 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sat, Dec 31, 2005 at 08:43:12PM -0800, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:

        > CN wrote:
        > >a.com is one of my virtual domains. I get a slew of these in the log,
        > >with various_names@....
        > >
        > >Is it better to do a 550 reject on these?
        >
        > No, it's not. Someone's DNS servers may be down for a bit -- that's why
        > a 4xx is used.
        >

        Postfix never returns 5XX for temporary lookup problems, even when it
        returns 5XX for NXDOMAIN and other hard failures. Setting the various
        reject codes to 5XX is safe and recommended once one is confident that
        the configuration is correct. This is better for the (legitimate) sender,
        because a timely bounce is much more useful than a 5 day delayed bounce.

        --
        Viktor.

        Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
        Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.

        To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
        http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
        <mailto:majordomo@...?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users>

        If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
        send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
        "It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.
      • Roger B.A. Klorese
        ... How is NXDOMAIN any more a hard failure? An authoritative server could be temporarily misconfigured...
        Message 3 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Victor Duchovni wrote:
          > Postfix never returns 5XX for temporary lookup problems, even when it
          > returns 5XX for NXDOMAIN and other hard failures.


          How is NXDOMAIN any more a "hard" failure? An authoritative server
          could be temporarily misconfigured...
        • Bastian Blank
          ... Why do you respect 5xx replies from a downstream server and bounce the message? It may be temporarily misconfigured. Bastian -- It is undignified for a
          Message 4 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 11:10:30AM -0800, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
            > How is NXDOMAIN any more a "hard" failure? An authoritative server
            > could be temporarily misconfigured...

            Why do you respect 5xx replies from a downstream server and bounce the
            message? It may be temporarily misconfigured.

            Bastian

            --
            It is undignified for a woman to play servant to a man who is not hers.
            -- Spock, "Amok Time", stardate 3372.7
          • Roger B.A. Klorese
            ... Fair enough. But I m inclined to have an SMTP client believe an SMTP server but question everything else.
            Message 5 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Bastian Blank wrote:
              > Why do you respect 5xx replies from a downstream server and bounce the
              > message? It may be temporarily misconfigured.
              >


              Fair enough. But I'm inclined to have an SMTP client believe an SMTP
              server but question everything else.
            • Len Conrad
              ... hard for me is negative protocol response (instead of no response). DNS NXDOMAIN or NODATA, or SMTP 5xx ain t my responsibility to mind-read, guess,
              Message 6 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                >>Postfix never returns 5XX for temporary lookup problems, even when it
                >>returns 5XX for NXDOMAIN and other hard failures.
                >
                >
                >How is NXDOMAIN any more a "hard" failure? An authoritative server
                >could be temporarily misconfigured...

                "hard" for me is negative protocol response (instead of no
                response). DNS NXDOMAIN or NODATA, or SMTP "5xx"

                ain't my responsibility to mind-read, guess, and hedge that their
                server is misconfigged. The sooner THEY pay for THEIR problems, the
                better off we all are.

                Len


                _____________________________________________________________________
                http://IMGate.MEIway.com : free anti-spam gateway, runs on 1000's of sites
              • Roger B.A. Klorese
                ... To me, the world is not me vs. them -- the goal is getting mail through, not scolding about other people s configurations.
                Message 7 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Len Conrad wrote:
                  > ain't my responsibility to mind-read, guess, and hedge that their
                  > server is misconfigged. The sooner THEY pay for THEIR problems, the
                  > better off we all are.


                  To me, the world is not "me vs. them" -- the goal is getting mail
                  through, not scolding about other people's configurations.
                • Arnt Gulbrandsen
                  ... In that case, the name server tells you I am authoritative and I know there is no such domain . It s not telling you there never was , it s not telling
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Roger B.A. Klorese writes:
                    > Victor Duchovni wrote:
                    >> Postfix never returns 5XX for temporary lookup problems, even when it
                    >> returns 5XX for NXDOMAIN and other hard failures.
                    >
                    > How is NXDOMAIN any more a "hard" failure? An authoritative server
                    > could be temporarily misconfigured...

                    In that case, the name server tells you "I am authoritative and I know
                    there is no such domain". It's not telling you "there never was", it's
                    not telling you "there never will be", but what it is saying is
                    qualitatively different from "I can't resolve that domain right now",
                    and so deserves different treatment.

                    Arnt
                  • mouss
                    ... so what? when they fix their system, then they ll post their mail! Systems should be optimized for the common case, not for rare cases. I prefer to get a
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Roger B.A. Klorese a écrit :
                      > Victor Duchovni wrote:
                      >
                      >> Postfix never returns 5XX for temporary lookup problems, even when it
                      >> returns 5XX for NXDOMAIN and other hard failures.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > How is NXDOMAIN any more a "hard" failure? An authoritative server
                      > could be temporarily misconfigured...
                      >
                      >

                      so what? when they fix their system, then they'll post their mail!
                      Systems should be optimized for the common case, not for rare cases.

                      I prefer to get a bounce telling me that my DNS server is misconfigured
                      than wait 4 days and get bounces for all the messages that my system
                      sent during that period of time.

                      If you don't like DNS failures, then don't base your mail decisions on
                      that. DNS isn't safe. If you base your smtp setup on it, then you have
                      the common denominator.
                    • Len Conrad
                      ... It s not 1995, or 2000. If mail admins won t/can t setup to look like part of the solution by now, then they pay whatever it costs to be part of the
                      Message 10 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        >To me, the world is not "me vs. them" -- the goal is getting mail
                        >through, not scolding about other people's configurations.

                        It's not 1995, or 2000.
                        If mail admins won't/can't setup to look like part of the solution by
                        now, then they pay whatever it costs to be part of the problem.

                        Len



                        _____________________________________________________________________
                        http://IMGate.MEIway.com : free anti-spam gateway, runs on 1000's of sites
                      • Roger B.A. Klorese
                        ... It doesn t matter if it s 1995, 2000, 2005, or 2037 -- when stopping mail becomes more important than delivering mail, there s no point in there being
                        Message 11 of 13 , Jan 1, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Len Conrad wrote:
                          > It's not 1995, or 2000.

                          It doesn't matter if it's 1995, 2000, 2005, or 2037 -- when stopping
                          mail becomes more important than delivering mail, there's no point in
                          there being mail.
                        • Victor Duchovni
                          ... This is getting seriously off-topic. Setting the DNS-based reject codes to 5XX is recommended as soon as one is confortable that the settings are correct.
                          Message 12 of 13 , Jan 2, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 11:03:39PM -0800, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:

                            > Len Conrad wrote:
                            > >It's not 1995, or 2000.
                            >
                            > It doesn't matter if it's 1995, 2000, 2005, or 2037 -- when stopping
                            > mail becomes more important than delivering mail, there's no point in
                            > there being mail.
                            >

                            This is getting seriously off-topic. Setting the DNS-based reject codes
                            to 5XX is recommended as soon as one is confortable that the settings
                            are correct. Persistent 4XX rejects that *don't* represent temporary
                            conditions are worse for the sender.

                            So either use "reject_unknown_sender_domain", ... with 5XX codes after
                            brief testing with 4XX codes (or soft_bounce=yes), or don't use them
                            at all.

                            Let's not drift into rec.talk.* territory. No off-topic followups please.

                            --
                            Viktor.

                            Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
                            Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.

                            To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
                            http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
                            <mailto:majordomo@...?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users>

                            If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
                            send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
                            "It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.