Well, yes, and I believe that postmaster@ must be assigned to a
mailbox. And, as a matter of fact I do have postmaster assigned to an
account here, as well as abuse@ and security@ and a couple of others,
per the RFC.

I was only speaking to the advisability of using postmaster as a
catchall address, or using catchalls in general, and that postmaster@
is not used for NDRs.

Exchange is a powerful tool, and like any powerful tool can be
misused, to great detriment.

Kurt

On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Michael B. Smith
<[email protected]> wrote:
> You CAN assign the postmaster address to a mailbox, if you wish.
>
> You can also create a quarantine mailbox that is used to store certain kinds
> of spam.
>
> Exchange is quite configurable. :-)
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Kurt Buff
> Sent: ‎2/‎12/‎2014 2:49 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Exchange] Spam and Postmaster Question
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Geoff Orlebeck <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> We recently replaced a new client’s SBS 2003 with Exchange 2010 SP3 UR4.
>> There is a user asking bout gaining access to Postmaster mailbox for spam
>> review. Am I crazy, or is the postmaster only used for NDR
>> delivery/replies?
>> This client has spam filtering provided by their web host (we are working
>> on
>> changing that as well). But she states she previously accessed
>> [email protected] for their spam emails. I just want to make sure
>> before I reply back that I’m not off base here. The
>> ExternalPostmasterAddress property is designed for NDR  and not spam,
>> correct? No spam emails will go and sit in the postmaster mailbox defined
>> on
>> Exchange….right?
>
>
> You are sort of correct.Using the postmaster@ address as a catchall is
> normally a mistake. However, NDRs are usually delivered with a null
> sender address, not with postmaster@.
>
> Well, I'd argue that using a catchall address is a mistake anyway, but
> that's a whole other discussion.
>
> See https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2142.txt for recommendations and
> requirements regarding standard email system accounts (I believe this
> is still the current RFC - but I haven't kept up for a few years).
>
> See also these fairly helpful links for a bit more info:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounce_message
>
> https://www.roe.ch/MTA_BCP
>
> Kurt
>
>


Reply via email to