Marc, you shouldn't be bouncing e-mails back at all. Use D_REJECT
and make sure you're doing it at the SMTP layer. SPF or DKIM is
irrelevant in this situation.
On Sep 23, 2007, at 5:31 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
One thing I would like to see (and this is a different subject:
Marc: take note: Id like to NOT BOUNCE an email back to the victim of
backscatter if they bothered to publish SPF or SENDER ID records that
don't match the incoming.
(and, yes, this would NOT work behind a proxy)
I would like the proxy to at LEAST have a copy of the valid userlist,
NOT muck with the headers.
MAYBE do its load balancing via bridging rather than store forward.
That might fix a lot. But then again, it would be easier to replace
the
proxy than fix it.
--
Michael Scheidell, CTO
Office: 561-999-5000 x 1259
Direct: 561-939-7259
Real time security alerts: http://www.secnap.com/news
______________________________________________________________________
___
This email has been scanned and certified safe by SpammerTrap(tm).
For Information please see http://www.spammertrap.com
______________________________________________________________________
___
----------------------------------------------------------------------
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
AMaViS-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user
AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3
AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
--
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source
and other randomness
