* * * * *
Sendmail Blows, and here's why
My my my … it looks like sendmail [1] might be the culprit here, not
Exchange. [2] As per RFC-821: [3]
>
> "User name" is a fuzzy term and used purposely. If a host
> implements the VRFY or EXPN commands then at least local mailboxes
> must be recognized as "user names". If a host chooses to
> recognize other strings as "user names" that is allowed.
>
> In some hosts the distinction between a mailing list and an alias
> for a single mailbox is a bit fuzzy, since a common data structure
> may hold both types of entries, and it is possible to have mailing
> lists of one mailbox. If a request is made to verify a mailing
> list a positive response can be given if on receipt of a message
> so addressed it will be delivered to everyone on the list,
> otherwise an error should be reported (e.g., "550 That is a
> mailing list, not a user"). If a request is made to expand a user
> name a positive response can be formed by returning a list
> containing one name, or an error can be reported (e.g., "550 That
> is a user name, not a mailing list").
>
>
> RFC-821, § 3.3. VERIFYING AND EXPANDING
>
>
> EXPAND (EXPN)
>
> This command asks the receiver to confirm that the argument
> identifies a mailing list, and if so, to return the
> membership of that list. The full name of the users (if
> known) and the fully specified mailboxes are returned in a
> multiline reply.
>
> This command has no effect on any of the reverse-path
> buffer, the forward-path buffer, or the mail data buffer.
>
>
> RFC-821, § 4.1.1. COMMAND SEMANTICS
>
From my reading, it seems that sendmail should not be sending back the
program name, but rather, it should just return the email address passed in.
This is not good …
[1]
http://www.sendmail.org/
[2]
gopher://gopher.conman.org/0Phlog:2000/08/22.3
[3]
ftp://nis.nsf.net/document/rfc/rfc0821.txt
Email author at
[email protected]