Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.theremailer.net!frell.theremailer.net!anonymous-x3!anonymous-x2!anonymous From: Fritz Wuehler Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above. It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software. Please report problems or inappropriate use to the remailer administrator at . Identifying the real sender is technically impossible. Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,alt.comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.headers Subject: Re: Would your SMTP server accept -> ehlo MAPI1.0 ??? References: <508C78EE.EAD2B0E9@Man.com> Message-ID: Precedence: anon Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:07:43 +0100 Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@frell.theremailer.net Organization: Frell Anonymous Remailer Xref: csiph.com comp.mail.misc:327 comp.mail.headers:8 Mail Man wrote: > Jorgen Grahn wrote: > > > On Sat, 2012-10-27, Solbu wrote: > > > >> I wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used > > >> this string for their ehlo greeting > > > > > > They use it because more and more SMTP servers require a > > > HELO/EHLO greeting before they accept any email. > > > > Huh? HELO has been mandatory with SMTP since the 1980s. > > You both missed the entire point of my original question. > > So I will repeat it. > > =========== > Recently I've been trying to figure out why a Trendnet TV-IP110w > IP-camera was not able to connect to my SMTP server to send mail. > > I performed some packet analysis and found that the camera was greeting > the server with this: > > ehlo MAPI1.0 > > And my server responds with this: > > 501 Invalid domain syntax > > In looking at the ehlo specifications, the greeting is supposed to > contain something that looks like a domain-name. So I believe the > string "MAPI1.0" is being rejected by my server on that basis. > ============ > > So you see, it's not that this camera wasn't generating a "ehlo" > greeting. > > The issue is the "MAPI1.0" part of the ehlo greeting that my SMTP server > apparently doesn't like, and it doesn't seem to like it because > according to SMTP standards "MAPI1.0" is not a valid domain-name. > > Comments? Yes, you're a lamer.