No '250 OK' after EHLO

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
23 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

No '250 OK' after EHLO

pwillis
Hello,

Why does postfix **NOT** send
'250 OK'
after EHLO has finished dumping server info?

According to RFC-821 '250 OK' should be returned
after **ALL** successful commands.

RFC-1869 does not invalidate the basic handshaking of
RFC-821.

When testing postfix SMTP I get no '250 OK'
after EHLO.

Am I missing a config file flag somewhere, or
is postfix a faulty mail server?

Thanks for any enlightenment,

Peter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

Ralf Hildebrandt
* pw <[hidden email]>:
> Hello,
>
> Why does postfix **NOT** send
> '250 OK'
> after EHLO has finished dumping server info?

It does:

~$ telnet mail.charite.de 25
Trying 141.42.4.200...
Connected to mail.charite.de.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 mail.charite.de ESMTP
EHLO foo.bar.com
250-mail.charite.de
250-PIPELINING
250-SIZE 20971520
250-ETRN
250-STARTTLS
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-8BITMIME
250 DSN

There's 250 everywhere.

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt

Normally, the response to EHLO will be a multiline reply.  Each line of
the response contains a keyword and, optionally, one or more parameters.
Following the normal syntax for multiline replies, these keyworks follow
the code (250) and a hyphen for all but the last line, and the code and a
space for the last line.

--
Ralf Hildebrandt ([hidden email])          [hidden email]
Postfix - Einrichtung, Betrieb und Wartung       Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155
http://www.arschkrebs.de
USER, n.: The word computer professionals use when they mean "idiot."
                              --Dave Barry, "Claw Your Way to the Top
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman
In reply to this post by pwillis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

pw wrote:
| When testing postfix SMTP I get no '250 OK'
| after EHLO.

It's there. And the RFC says that a "250[space][arbitrary text]" final response line is to be sent,
with any "250[dash][arbitrary text]" response lines before that.

And that's what postfix does. If it didn't... you'll get no email :)

root@mx2:~# telnet mx1 25
Trying 10.100.0.1...
Connected to mx1.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 mx1.mailfighter.net Postfix ESMTP (Buanzo Consulting http://www.buanzo.com.ar/pro/eng.html)
EHLO mx2.mailfighter.net
250-mx1.mailfighter.net
250-PIPELINING
250-SIZE 10240000
250-VRFY
250-ETRN
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-8BITMIME
250 DSN



- --
Arturo "Buanzo" Busleiman
Reliable inter-continental Mail Relay Service - Ask me!
Independent Security Consultant - SANS - OISSG
http://www.buanzo.com.ar/pro/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFILdLnAlpOsGhXcE0RCpPfAKCCsmjB9C/dZ/LcluQMRNrtCheXsACeNfO8
rx5k0DTVI015Qs9gcSzUc+M=
=YEF0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

Ralf Hildebrandt
In reply to this post by Ralf Hildebrandt
* Ralf Hildebrandt <[hidden email]>:
> * pw <[hidden email]>:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Why does postfix **NOT** send
> > '250 OK'
> > after EHLO has finished dumping server info?
>
> It does:

And by the way: RFC 821 doesn't even specify EHLO...
--
Ralf Hildebrandt ([hidden email])          [hidden email]
Postfix - Einrichtung, Betrieb und Wartung       Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155
http://www.arschkrebs.de
"The computer programmer is a creator of universes for which he alone
is responsible. Universes of virtually unlimited complexity can be
created in the form of computer programs."-Joseph Weizenbaum
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

James Lay
In reply to this post by pwillis



On 5/16/08 12:25 PM, "pw" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Why does postfix **NOT** send
> '250 OK'
> after EHLO has finished dumping server info?
>
> According to RFC-821 '250 OK' should be returned
> after **ALL** successful commands.
>
> RFC-1869 does not invalidate the basic handshaking of
> RFC-821.
>
> When testing postfix SMTP I get no '250 OK'
> after EHLO.
>
> Am I missing a config file flag somewhere, or
> is postfix a faulty mail server?
>
> Thanks for any enlightenment,
>
> Peter

Looks good on my end:

[07:27:02 jlay@mail:~$] telnet 127.0.0.1 25
Trying 127.0.0.1...
Connected to localhost.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 slave-tothe-box.net ESMTP Postfix
EHLO bleh.net
250-slave-tothe-box.net
250-PIPELINING
250-SIZE
250-VRFY
250-ETRN
250-STARTTLS
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-8BITMIME
250 DSN
^]
telnet> quit
Connection closed.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman
In reply to this post by Ralf Hildebrandt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
| And by the way: RFC 821 doesn't even specify EHLO...

Even worse, RFC 821 is Obsoleted by RFC2821.
http://rfc-editor.org/cgi-bin/rfcsearch.pl?searchwords=rfc2821&opt=All+fields&num=25 \
&format=ftp&orgkeyword=821&filefmt=txt&search_doc=search_all&match_method=prefix& \
abstract=absoff&keywords=keyoff&sort_method=newer

- --
Arturo "Buanzo" Busleiman
Reliable inter-continental Mail Relay Service - Ask me!
Independent Security Consultant - SANS - OISSG
http://www.buanzo.com.ar/pro/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFILdO+AlpOsGhXcE0RCtqbAJ4xzK5MKDKt9Qk7GfvRiX9gcXircACeKLFs
9kDFCPQwMOdCqcxA12JnOc4=
=zAsB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

Jorey Bump
In reply to this post by pwillis
pw wrote, at 05/16/2008 02:25 PM:

> Why does postfix **NOT** send
> '250 OK'
> after EHLO has finished dumping server info?
>
> According to RFC-821 '250 OK' should be returned
> after **ALL** successful commands.
>
> RFC-1869 does not invalidate the basic handshaking of
> RFC-821.

No, but it extends it. It *is* called "SMTP Service Extensions", after all.

> When testing postfix SMTP I get no '250 OK'
> after EHLO.

The multiline response is specified in RFC-1869. It's very clear what
the last line should be.

> Am I missing a config file flag somewhere, or
> is postfix a faulty mail server?

Postfix obeys RFC 1869 in this regard. Can you provide an example of a
server that doesn't, and responds according to your interpretation?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

mouss-2
In reply to this post by pwillis
pw wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Why does postfix **NOT** send
> '250 OK'
> after EHLO has finished dumping server info?
>
> According to RFC-821 '250 OK' should be returned
> after **ALL** successful commands.
>
> RFC-1869 does not invalidate the basic handshaking of
> RFC-821.
>
> When testing postfix SMTP I get no '250 OK'
> after EHLO.
>
> Am I missing a config file flag somewhere, or
> is postfix a faulty mail server?


if I connect to postfix, send an EHLO command and disconnect my cable, I
don't get a response. but this has never been a problem for me.

if you notice a problem, please describe exactly what you do, what you
see, what you get, ... etc.


anyway, postfix does respond to the HELO/EHLO command. and this is why a
lot of people get mail!


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

pwillis
In reply to this post by Ralf Hildebrandt
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:

> * Ralf Hildebrandt <[hidden email]>:
>> * pw <[hidden email]>:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Why does postfix **NOT** send
>>> '250 OK'
>>> after EHLO has finished dumping server info?
>> It does:
>
> And by the way: RFC 821 doesn't even specify EHLO...

821...my mistake. Should be RFC2821

I wasn't looking for a flame war, just a clarification
regarding the server output after EHLO.

After seeing various mail servers in action I have noticed
that the '250 OK' message is sent after EHLO extended information
by some and not by others.

Upon reading the RFCs (See excerpt below), to clarify the proper
behaviour, it appeared unclear whether '250 OK' should be appended
after extended information. The paragraph seems to indicate that
*YES* it should, to ensure that the client knows that
the extended information has finished and that the server is now in
a suitable READY state.

I'm not sure how to interpret the third paragraph from the RFC in the
excerpt below.
It seems that proper protocol should expect the extended information
and then '250 OK' to indicate that the server is in a 'READY' state.


<EXCERPT>

RFC 2821             Simple Mail Transfer Protocol            April 2001


    available), the client SHOULD send an address literal (see section
    4.1.3), optionally followed by information that will help to identify
    the client system.  y The SMTP server identifies itself to the SMTP
    client in the connection greeting reply and in the response to this
    command.

    A client SMTP SHOULD start an SMTP session by issuing the EHLO
    command.  If the SMTP server supports the SMTP service extensions it
    will give a successful response, a failure response, or an error
    response.  If the SMTP server, in violation of this specification,
    does not support any SMTP service extensions it will generate an
    error response.  Older client SMTP systems MAY, as discussed above,
    use HELO (as specified in RFC 821) instead of EHLO, and servers MUST
    support the HELO command and reply properly to it.  In any event, a
    client MUST issue HELO or EHLO before starting a mail transaction.

    These commands, and a "250 OK" reply to one of them, confirm that
    both the SMTP client and the SMTP server are in the initial state,
    that is, there is no transaction in progress and all state tables and
    buffers are cleared.

</EXCERPT>


I'm sure everyones mail works fine. I'm very happy and relieved to hear
that is so. However, just because the car can limp along on three flat
wheels does not mean that the car is running either optimally or
correctly.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

Victor Duchovni
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 01:02:22PM -0700, pw wrote:

>    These commands, and a "250 OK" reply to one of them, confirm that
>    both the SMTP client and the SMTP server are in the initial state,
>    that is, there is no transaction in progress and all state tables and
>    buffers are cleared.

The "OK" is not to be taken literally. It is a generic placehold for
text that follows a positive (2XX) response code.

--
        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:[hidden email]?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.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

pwillis
In reply to this post by mouss-2
mouss wrote:

> pw wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Why does postfix **NOT** send
>> '250 OK'
>> after EHLO has finished dumping server info?
>>
>> According to RFC-821 '250 OK' should be returned
>> after **ALL** successful commands.
>>
>> RFC-1869 does not invalidate the basic handshaking of
>> RFC-821.
>>
>> When testing postfix SMTP I get no '250 OK'
>> after EHLO.
>>
>> Am I missing a config file flag somewhere, or
>> is postfix a faulty mail server?
>
>
> if I connect to postfix, send an EHLO command and disconnect my cable, I
> don't get a response. but this has never been a problem for me.
>
> if you notice a problem, please describe exactly what you do, what you
> see, what you get, ... etc.
>
>
> anyway, postfix does respond to the HELO/EHLO command. and this is why a
> lot of people get mail!
>


Yes, when you send EHLO you get extended information. A list. That's
fine, it should do that. However, after the list of extended information
has finished, what indication does the server give (other than waitng)
that the list has ended and the server is once again in a ready state
for another command?

'250 OK' would indicate that the server has completed the extended
information and is ready for another command.

 From a programmatic viewpoint we can just keep reading
'250 <arbitrary_text>' lines until they stop coming, then
give the next command. It is, however, difficult for a client
to differentiate between a state where the server has paused
between extended server information lines and the actual end of
extended server information.

Thus, my point was the lack of '250 OK', after the end
of the extended information list, appears to be arbitrary
and incomplete.

Peter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

mouss-2
In reply to this post by pwillis
pw wrote:

>
> 821...my mistake. Should be RFC2821
>
> I wasn't looking for a flame war, just a clarification
> regarding the server output after EHLO.
>
> After seeing various mail servers in action I have noticed
> that the '250 OK' message is sent after EHLO extended information
> by some and not by others.
>
> Upon reading the RFCs (See excerpt below), to clarify the proper
> behaviour, it appeared unclear whether '250 OK' should be appended
> after extended information. The paragraph seems to indicate that
> *YES* it should, to ensure that the client knows that
> the extended information has finished and that the server is now in
> a suitable READY state.
>
> I'm not sure how to interpret the third paragraph from the RFC in the
> excerpt below.
> It seems that proper protocol should expect the extended information
> and then '250 OK' to indicate that the server is in a 'READY' state.
>


Please take the time to read before asking. RFC2821 contains examples
that should make it clear:

D.1 A Typical SMTP Transaction Scenario

   This SMTP example shows mail sent by Smith at host bar.com, to Jones,
   Green, and Brown at host foo.com.  Here we assume that host bar.com
   contacts host foo.com directly.  The mail is accepted for Jones and
   Brown.  Green does not have a mailbox at host foo.com.

      S: 220 foo.com Simple Mail Transfer Service Ready
      C: EHLO bar.com
      S: 250-foo.com greets bar.com
      S: 250-8BITMIME
      S: 250-SIZE
      S: 250-DSN
      S: 250 HELP
      C: MAIL FROM:<[hidden email]>
      ...


as you can see, there is no "250 OK".


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

mouss-2
In reply to this post by pwillis
pw wrote:

> mouss wrote:
>> pw wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Why does postfix **NOT** send
>>> '250 OK'
>>> after EHLO has finished dumping server info?
>>>
>>> According to RFC-821 '250 OK' should be returned
>>> after **ALL** successful commands.
>>>
>>> RFC-1869 does not invalidate the basic handshaking of
>>> RFC-821.
>>>
>>> When testing postfix SMTP I get no '250 OK'
>>> after EHLO.
>>>
>>> Am I missing a config file flag somewhere, or
>>> is postfix a faulty mail server?
>>
>>
>> if I connect to postfix, send an EHLO command and disconnect my
>> cable, I don't get a response. but this has never been a problem for me.
>>
>> if you notice a problem, please describe exactly what you do, what
>> you see, what you get, ... etc.
>>
>>
>> anyway, postfix does respond to the HELO/EHLO command. and this is
>> why a lot of people get mail!
>>
>
>
> Yes, when you send EHLO you get extended information. A list. That's
> fine, it should do that. However, after the list of extended
> information has finished, what indication does the server give (other
> than waitng)
> that the list has ended and the server is once again in a ready state
> for another command?

please read the RFCs. the last "response" has no '-' after the status code.

220- ...
220- ...
...
220 blah blah

do you see the '-' after 220 in all but the last line?

>
> '250 OK' would indicate that the server has completed the extended
> information and is ready for another command.
>
> From a programmatic viewpoint we can just keep reading
> '250 <arbitrary_text>' lines until they stop coming, then
> give the next command. It is, however, difficult for a client
> to differentiate between a state where the server has paused
> between extended server information lines and the actual end of
> extended server information.
>
> Thus, my point was the lack of '250 OK', after the end
> of the extended information list, appears to be arbitrary
> and incomplete.

you need to check the 4th character. see above.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

Noel Jones-2
In reply to this post by pwillis
pw wrote:

> mouss wrote:
>> pw wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Why does postfix **NOT** send
>>> '250 OK'
>>> after EHLO has finished dumping server info?
>>>
>>> According to RFC-821 '250 OK' should be returned
>>> after **ALL** successful commands.
>>>
>>> RFC-1869 does not invalidate the basic handshaking of
>>> RFC-821.
>>>
>>> When testing postfix SMTP I get no '250 OK'
>>> after EHLO.
>>>
>>> Am I missing a config file flag somewhere, or
>>> is postfix a faulty mail server?
>>
>>
>> if I connect to postfix, send an EHLO command and disconnect my cable,
>> I don't get a response. but this has never been a problem for me.
>>
>> if you notice a problem, please describe exactly what you do, what you
>> see, what you get, ... etc.
>>
>>
>> anyway, postfix does respond to the HELO/EHLO command. and this is why
>> a lot of people get mail!
>>
>
>
> Yes, when you send EHLO you get extended information. A list. That's
> fine, it should do that. However, after the list of extended information
> has finished, what indication does the server give (other than waitng)
> that the list has ended and the server is once again in a ready state
> for another command?
>
> '250 OK' would indicate that the server has completed the extended
> information and is ready for another command.
>
>  From a programmatic viewpoint we can just keep reading
> '250 <arbitrary_text>' lines until they stop coming, then
> give the next command. It is, however, difficult for a client
> to differentiate between a state where the server has paused
> between extended server information lines and the actual end of
> extended server information.
>
> Thus, my point was the lack of '250 OK', after the end
> of the extended information list, appears to be arbitrary
> and incomplete.
>
> Peter


The "250 OK" you see in the RFC is in commentary, not protocol
documentation, to remind the reader that 250 indicates OK.

The protocol is defined in section 4.1.1.1

Basically, "250-text comment" indicates not the last line,
"250 text comment" indicates the last line.  The software is
to only use the numeric code and not the text comment.

--
Noel Jones
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

pwillis
In reply to this post by mouss-2
mouss wrote:

> pw wrote:
>>
>> 821...my mistake. Should be RFC2821
>>
>> I wasn't looking for a flame war, just a clarification
>> regarding the server output after EHLO.
>>
>> After seeing various mail servers in action I have noticed
>> that the '250 OK' message is sent after EHLO extended information
>> by some and not by others.
>>
>> Upon reading the RFCs (See excerpt below), to clarify the proper
>> behaviour, it appeared unclear whether '250 OK' should be appended
>> after extended information. The paragraph seems to indicate that
>> *YES* it should, to ensure that the client knows that
>> the extended information has finished and that the server is now in
>> a suitable READY state.
>>
>> I'm not sure how to interpret the third paragraph from the RFC in the
>> excerpt below.
>> It seems that proper protocol should expect the extended information
>> and then '250 OK' to indicate that the server is in a 'READY' state.
>>
>
>
> Please take the time to read before asking. RFC2821 contains examples
> that should make it clear:
>
> D.1 A Typical SMTP Transaction Scenario
>
>   This SMTP example shows mail sent by Smith at host bar.com, to Jones,
>   Green, and Brown at host foo.com.  Here we assume that host bar.com
>   contacts host foo.com directly.  The mail is accepted for Jones and
>   Brown.  Green does not have a mailbox at host foo.com.
>
>      S: 220 foo.com Simple Mail Transfer Service Ready
>      C: EHLO bar.com
>      S: 250-foo.com greets bar.com
>      S: 250-8BITMIME
>      S: 250-SIZE
>      S: 250-DSN
>      S: 250 HELP
>      C: MAIL FROM:<[hidden email]>
>      ...
>
>
> as you can see, there is no "250 OK".


Yes, I understand that this is how it is currently working.
Is there, however, an error or problem in the RFC?

Peter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

Victor Duchovni
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 01:21:12PM -0700, pw wrote:

> Yes, I understand that this is how it is currently working.
> Is there, however, an error or problem in the RFC?

Common sense suggests that a stable and widely implemented RFC such as
2821 the first thing to check is your interpretation. Suspect errors in
the RFC only as a last resort. Ask for help understanding the RFC:

    - How can I tell whether the HELO response (or any multi-line
    response) is complete?

Don't claim the RFC or a widely used implementation is in error:

    - Help the RFC is broken / Postfix violates the RFC / ...

--
        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:[hidden email]?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.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

pwillis
In reply to this post by mouss-2
mouss wrote:

>
> please read the RFCs. the last "response" has no '-' after the status code.
>
> 220- ...
> 220- ...
> ...
> 220 blah blah
>
> do you see the '-' after 220 in all but the last line?
>
<////////>
> you need to check the 4th character. see above.
>
>

Thank you, you are correct. I now see what the client should
be looking for.
I thought the hyphen was *also* arbitrary text, but
it's actually the spacer.

<EXCERPT>

    Normally, the response to EHLO will be a multiline reply.  Each line
    of the response contains a keyword and, optionally, one or more
    parameters.  Following the normal syntax for multiline replies, these
    keyworks follow the code (250) and a hyphen for all but the last
    line, and the code and a space for the last line.

</EXCERPT>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

mouss-2
In reply to this post by pwillis
pw wrote:

> mouss wrote:
>> pw wrote:
>>>
>>> 821...my mistake. Should be RFC2821
>>>
>>> I wasn't looking for a flame war, just a clarification
>>> regarding the server output after EHLO.
>>>
>>> After seeing various mail servers in action I have noticed
>>> that the '250 OK' message is sent after EHLO extended information
>>> by some and not by others.
>>>
>>> Upon reading the RFCs (See excerpt below), to clarify the proper
>>> behaviour, it appeared unclear whether '250 OK' should be appended
>>> after extended information. The paragraph seems to indicate that
>>> *YES* it should, to ensure that the client knows that
>>> the extended information has finished and that the server is now in
>>> a suitable READY state.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how to interpret the third paragraph from the RFC in
>>> the excerpt below.
>>> It seems that proper protocol should expect the extended information
>>> and then '250 OK' to indicate that the server is in a 'READY' state.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Please take the time to read before asking. RFC2821 contains examples
>> that should make it clear:
>>
>> D.1 A Typical SMTP Transaction Scenario
>>
>>   This SMTP example shows mail sent by Smith at host bar.com, to Jones,
>>   Green, and Brown at host foo.com.  Here we assume that host bar.com
>>   contacts host foo.com directly.  The mail is accepted for Jones and
>>   Brown.  Green does not have a mailbox at host foo.com.
>>
>>      S: 220 foo.com Simple Mail Transfer Service Ready
>>      C: EHLO bar.com
>>      S: 250-foo.com greets bar.com
>>      S: 250-8BITMIME
>>      S: 250-SIZE
>>      S: 250-DSN
>>      S: 250 HELP
>>      C: MAIL FROM:<[hidden email]>
>>      ...
>>
>>
>> as you can see, there is no "250 OK".
>
>
> Yes, I understand that this is how it is currently working.

The above is not a "how it is working now". the above is an excerpt from
the RFC, the text that defines SMTP.

> Is there, however, an error or problem in the RFC?

yes, there is a problem with the RFC: it does not conform to MS exchange
behaviour ;-p

come on...






Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

pwillis
In reply to this post by Victor Duchovni
Victor Duchovni wrote:

> On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 01:21:12PM -0700, pw wrote:
>
>> Yes, I understand that this is how it is currently working.
>> Is there, however, an error or problem in the RFC?
>
> Common sense suggests that a stable and widely implemented RFC such as
> 2821 the first thing to check is your interpretation. Suspect errors in
> the RFC only as a last resort. Ask for help understanding the RFC:
>
>     - How can I tell whether the HELO response (or any multi-line
>     response) is complete?
>
> Don't claim the RFC or a widely used implementation is in error:
>
>     - Help the RFC is broken / Postfix violates the RFC / ...
>

Thanks. It turned out to be my lax reading of the full RFC text.

<EXCERPT>

    The format for multiline replies requires that every line, except the
    last, begin with the reply code, followed immediately by a hyphen,
    "-" (also known as minus), followed by text.  The last line will
    begin with the reply code, followed immediately by <SP>, optionally
    some text, and <CRLF>.  As noted above, servers SHOULD send the <SP>
    if subsequent text is not sent, but clients MUST be prepared for it
    to be omitted.

</EXCERPT>

Many thanks to everyone who helped turn the lights on.

Peter
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No '250 OK' after EHLO

Victor Duchovni
In reply to this post by mouss-2
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 10:35:50PM +0200, mouss wrote:

> yes, there is a problem with the RFC: it does not conform to MS exchange
> behaviour ;-p

Perhaps we should publish an RFC for a new ESMTP extension called
"OK". When the server advertises the "OK" feature the client MUST pretend
everything is "OK", and treat the message as delivered to all recipients
no matter what subsequent command response codes might indicate.

Interestingly, in anticipation of this future standard, Exchange servers
already support this ESMTP extension :-)

--
        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:[hidden email]?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.
12