Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA26374; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:04:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: by cs.cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.10); Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:04:09 -0400 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA26267; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:04:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nic.funet.fi (nic.funet.fi [128.214.248.6]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA26252; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:04:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by nic.funet.fi id <10429-3474>; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 21:03:43 +0300 Subject: Re: smtpupd-07 comments From: mea@nic.funet.fi To: tony@att.com (Tony Hansen) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 21:03:43 +0300 (EET DST) Cc: drums@cs.utk.edu In-Reply-To: <357823A5.BCBCDFD4@att.com> from "Tony Hansen" at Jun 5, 98 12:58:14 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Message-Id: <19980605180344Z10429-3474+272@nic.funet.fi> ... > Don't I get essentially the same information that VRFY gives by using > RCPT TO? > > MAIL FROM:<> > RCPT TO: > > As soon as I get the 250 ok back, I've verified the address to the same > degree that VRFY is supposed to do. I may not get back the user name, > but I HAVE verified that the address is valid and will be accepted by > the system. No, you don't get that in all systems: mail from:<> 250 2.1.0 Sender syntax Ok rcpt to: 250 2.1.5 Recipient address syntax Ok rcpt to: 553-5.7.1 Policy analysis found DNS error on 553-5.7.1 the target address. This address is 553 5.7.1 not currently acceptable. That is, some things are tested on real-time, but not everything. (Originally that smtp-server said "250 Ok" to every MAIL FROM/RCPT TO command, but the abusive spamming boom made end of that..) Here the "250" reply means: "Ok, I will accept this message recipient address, and if it fails, I will send the error report(s)." If I enable VRFY, it means starting the rather heavy machinery of local message routing, and related database accesses. > -- > Tony Hansen > tony@att.com /Matti Aarnio