AOL Lameness

Jeff Shultz jeffshultz at
Mon Oct 2 18:20:42 UTC 2006

Along the lines of "a picture is worth...etc.." an actual example of an 
e-mail that is sent out generating that error would be very useful.

I'm guessing that, from the page at the URL provided, AOL has decided 
that banning dotted quads from e-mails will cut down on the spam and 
phishing scams. They very well might be right.

Mike Lyon wrote:
> OK, I should clarify this. The description that is on that link I put
> in my original e-mail doesn't actually describe what is happening, but
> that is the error they spit back at me.
> What really is happening is that the url that is in my e-mail and when
> you reolve it to an IP, if you do a reverse lookup on that IP, it
> comes back with a generic DNS entry that my colo provider has assigned
> to it. So the issue seems to be that the reverse DNS entry and the
> domain name don't match. But this isn't really an issue, a lot of
> providers do it this way.
> But why is AOL being lame with this?
> -Mike
> On 10/2/06, Matt Baldwin <baldwinmathew at> wrote:
>> Yes, I'm noticing this too.  Very lame indeed.  Doing a quick Google
>> on it in the Groups it seems that it was a feature that was enabled
>> earlier this year.  My guess is they turned it off, then turned it
>> back on. Anyone from AOL care to explain this behavior and what should
>> be communicated to the end-user?
>> Thanks.
>> -matt
>> On 10/2/06, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon at> wrote:
>> >
>> > Is anyone else noticing new AOL lameness that when you send an e-mail
>> > to an AOL user and if the e-mail has a URL in it but the reverse
>> > lookup of that url doesn't come back to that domain name that AOL's
>> > postmaster rejects it and gives you this URL:
>> >
>> >
>> > This has to be new policty for them because it never rejected them 
>> before...
>> >
>> > Ugh.
>> >
>> > -Mike
>> >

Jeff Shultz

More information about the NANOG mailing list