From: mouss (usebsdfree.fr)
Date: Mon Oct 03 2005 - 13:33:20 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Arnt Gulbrandsen a écrit :

> Jim Wright writes:
>
>> On Oct 3, 2005, at 5:07 AM, Mariano Cunietti wrote:
>>
>>> There's no point that states an SMTP client should mandatorily give
>>> an FQDN. Can anybody address me to any resource I can eventually
>>> look at?
>>
>>
>> RFC 2821, section 3.6:
>>
>> http://asg.web.cmu.edu/rfc/rfc2821.html#sec-3.6
>>
>> Only resolvable, fully-qualified domain names are permitted in SMTP.
>
>
> One minor nit: The subject of this thread talks about host names,
> while 2821 section 3.6 talks about domain names.

Since hostnames (in the DNS sense) are domain names (even if the
converse isn't true), 3.6 restrictions apply.

> There is a difference. For example, «iana.org» has sensible MX
> records, so it is a fully resolvable domain name as required by 2821
> 3.6, but it has no A/AAAA records, so it's not a host name.
>
The question is: Would 'iana.org' be "a valid principal host domain name
for the client host" (rfc1123)?

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]