since the site is dos'd: http://web.archive.org/web/20110707211652/http://bar.com/
foo@bar.com is a real email address
71–80 of 98 posts
Re: foo@bar.com is a real email address
#72I used to work for a company that hosted customer.com. Microsoft, on more than one occasion, sent thousands and thousands of emails to customer@customer.com.
One developer probably entered customer@customer.com in a database, and then another guy probably accidentally triggered the "email everybody in the database" script. I can see how that would happen. I've obviously never personally done anything like that but I know a guy who tripped the "Send sales report to CFO" using test data once when I was an intern.
Re: foo@bar.com is a real email address
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
*.local is a great example of why not to use a domain that just 'sounds good' as an internal dns suffix, as it is used by bonjour/avahi[1] I had to rename an entire corporate network once because the previous folks thought .local "looked good". It cause constant issues with clients that had bonjour or avahi running. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.local
Wait, why doesnt apple just fix its software? .local isn't reserved. Seems like picking some arbitrary fix over another isn't helping matters.
Because in 99.9999% of use cases it won't break.
That, and mDNS already being used as a psuedo-standard with things like Avahi.
Re: foo@bar.com is a real email address
#74We get a lot of crap email address signups at http://feefighters.com We do a little bit of filtering to check that the email address is legit, but let you get by anyway (with an additional click) if it isn't... we have a 1-click unsubscribe but this is making me rethink whether we should let fake email addresses through at all. We recently got this email from Fake.com Hello We own the domain fake.com, and from time t…
The only reason they'd notice & care is because they received email they didn't want, right?
I assume you have an obvious 1-click subscribe on all of your emails? If not, I'd gladly mark you as spam over, and over, and over...
Re: foo@bar.com is a real email address
#75Haha, that's why I always use a dummy email addy at our own domain and make sure all unrouted mail bounces.
Re: foo@bar.com is a real email address
#76We get a lot of crap email address signups at http://feefighters.com We do a little bit of filtering to check that the email address is legit, but let you get by anyway (with an additional click) if it isn't... we have a 1-click unsubscribe but this is making me rethink whether we should let fake email addresses through at all. We recently got this email from Fake.com Hello We own the domain fake.com, and from time t…
They must be using a catch-all address otherwise most emails wouldn't exist and bounce without much notice.
Re: foo@bar.com is a real email address
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
*.local is a great example of why not to use a domain that just 'sounds good' as an internal dns suffix, as it is used by bonjour/avahi[1] I had to rename an entire corporate network once because the previous folks thought .local "looked good". It cause constant issues with clients that had bonjour or avahi running. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.local
Wait, why doesnt apple just fix its software? .local isn't reserved. Seems like picking some arbitrary fix over another isn't helping matters.
Well, .local would be reserved if the mDNS draft, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cheshire-dnsext-multicastdn... , ever progressed to an actual RFC. It is already a de-facto standard, with several implementations.
Re: foo@bar.com is a real email address
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except some people fall back to the A record (see RFC 5321).
Can you please let me know where you're seeing this? I looked through http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321 for /\sa\s/i and /(fall(\s)?back)/i and didn't find anything related to this this behaviour. I ask because I'd like to have my answer at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8221381/where-does-email-... be as accurate as possible (plus I'm now curious about this). Thanks!
it's not a fallback, it's the default behavior. originally when you would send mail to a user at a host, the MTA would just connect to that host on port 25. the original SMTP RFC (821) pre-dates any DNS RFCs, so originally there wasn't even a concept of MX records and you just e-mailed someone at the server they had an account on.
after DNS was in place, MX records came along in order to route mail destined for a host to a different server, or just supply a list of backup servers. now since most people just use email addresses containing only a domain, MX records are pretty much common place (since the A record of many domains resolves to the web server). now MTAs check for MX records before trying to connect directly to the host.
to demonstrate:
jcs@thalamus:~> host -t mx test.jcs.org
test.jcs.org has no MX record
jcs@thalamus:~> host test.jcs.org
test.jcs.org has address 10.10.10.10
jcs@thalamus:~> echo test | mail test@test.jcs.org
Nov 21 22:59:18 thalamus postfix/smtp[23742]: connect to test.jcs.org[10.10.10.10]:25: Operation timed outRe: foo@bar.com is a real email address
#79why is this interesting?
Re: foo@bar.com is a real email address
#80I thought this is basic knowledge of everyone technically engaged in Internet stuff. But apparently, this isn't the case, despite its well-known and very readable documentation! [1] It says: 1) There are exactly 3 domains the IANA keeps free for that purpose: example.com example.net example.org 2) In addition, all domains under the following 3 top level domains can be used freely for that purpose: *.test *.example *.…
doh, test@test.com must be pissed.