Re: Verisign changes violates RFC2821, and spam implications

[Bruce Campbell <bc-nanog () vicious dropbear id au>]

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Stewart, William C (Bill), RTSLS wrote:

> is there some conceivable case for which this system _would_ accept a message,
> e.g. postmaster () real-name-for-that-machine verisign com ?

There would be no reason for that particular machine(s) to receive
legitimate email for itself, as Verisign can (and should) easily put an MX
record pointing to another machine to handle legitimate mail directed
@sitefinder-idn.verisign.com .  Ergo, the hopefully more polite version of
Snubby can cancel the SMTP transaction without having to check whether its
mail directed to itself.

--==--
Bruce.