verizon.net and other email grief
Crist Clark
crist.clark at globalstar.com
Fri Dec 10 23:16:34 UTC 2004
Krzysztof Adamski wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Jeffrey I. Schiller wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 12:26:59PM -0500, Rich Kulawiec wrote:
>>
>>>One thing that's not clear is whether or not Verizon caches any of
>>>this information.
>>
>>It appears that they do some amount of caching.
>>
>> -Jeff
>>
>
>
> It does not appear that they are caching it, here is a sample from my log
> file:
>
> Dec 6 19:18:15 white sm-mta[25976]: iB70IF6n025976: <lopqp at abc.net>... User unknown
> Dec 6 19:18:15 white sm-mta[25977]: iB70IF6n025977: <lopqp at abc.net>... User unknown
> Dec 6 19:18:16 white sm-mta[25976]: iB70IF6n025976: from=<>, size=0, class=0, nrcpts=0, proto=SMTP, daemon=MTA, relay=sc006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182]
> Dec 6 19:18:16 white sm-mta[25977]: iB70IF6n025977: from=<>, size=0, class=0, nrcpts=0, proto=SMTP, daemon=MTA, relay=sc019pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.68]
> Dec 6 19:18:16 white sm-mta[25976]: iB70IF6o025976: <lopqp at abc.net>... User unknown
> Dec 6 19:18:16 white sm-mta[25977]: iB70IF6o025977: <lopqp at abc.net>... User unknown
> Dec 6 19:18:16 white sm-mta[25976]: iB70IF6o025976: lost input channel from sc006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182] to MTA after rcpt
> Dec 6 19:18:16 white sm-mta[25976]: iB70IF6o025976: from=<antispam245967 at west.verizon.net>, size=0, class=0, nrcpts=0, proto=SMTP, daemon=MTA, relay=sc006pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.182]
> Dec 6 19:18:16 white sm-mta[25977]: iB70IF6o025977: lost input channel from sc019pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.68] to MTA after rcpt
> Dec 6 19:18:16 white sm-mta[25977]: iB70IF6o025977: from=<antispam830748 at west.verizon.net>, size=0, class=0, nrcpts=0, proto=SMTP, daemon=MTA, relay=sc019pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.68]
>
> What happens when verizon tries to send email to somebody who does the same
> type of check, does this not create an infinite loop?
Not if Verizon treats the antispam[0-9]+ mailboxes in a special manner
and answers without a check. And they have to answer that the box exists
or things are gonna _really_ break.
Doing a quick test using the last antispam[0-9]+ address in my SMTP logs,
I got all 250 responses without a more recent call back.
--
Crist J. Clark crist.clark at globalstar.com
Globalstar Communications (408) 933-4387
More information about the NANOG
mailing list