Re: PTR Records and hosting our own mail

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

From: Javier Gomez [SBS MVP] (javier_gomez_at_remove.this.engineer.com)
Date: 07/10/04 

Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2004 13:37:42 -0400

Can you post the NDR that you get when you try to send mail to the
problematic domains?

The last section of this article deals with determining if you have the
proper PTR records (which for prosound dot com they are only "generic"). Is
not just having PTR records, its having them match your domain. Also
remember there are other reasons for being blacklisted.
http://www.sbslinks.com/DNS_Smarthost.htm

>From your example you would have to contact Company B for getting the proper
PTR record (which are the ones that "owns" the IP range). 

-- 
Javier [SBS MVP]
<< SBS ROCKS !!! >>
"Chester" <chester@NOSPAMprosoundusa.com> wrote in message
news:O0UDpxpZEHA.3664@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
> We are hosting our own mail on our SBS2k3, and using DNS to send mail.
(Not
> through a SmartHost).
>
> However, there are several domains that have been rejecting our mail,
> apparently using ReverseDNS, and finding that our domain (prosoundusa dot
> com) is not hosted at the mail server's IP address.
>
> We tried sending mail to those troublesome domains through a SmartHost,
but
> still no luck, the messages still got refused!
>
> To complicate matters,
>
> Company A hosts our domain/website,
> Company B provides our DSL (w/static IP),
> Company C contracts with Company B to provide mail services to the DSL
> accounts (We don't use their mail, but POP and SMTP accounts are
available),
> We have a DynDns account to associate a domain name with our static IP,
> and WE host our own mail server! Complicated enough?
>
> So, the question is, what can we do so that reverse DNS lookups (or
whatever
> these troublesome domains are using to decide to reject our mail) resolve
to
> our mail server's IP or Domain name?
>
> Is it the PTR? If so, WHO in the above list is responsible for that
record?
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Chester
>
>