On 6/29/06 10:40 AM, "Robert Millan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> E.g., I don't think anyone would want to use this for his main address (the > one > in his From: headers), but if he has other addresses that are obsolete and/or > barely used, but still generate a lot of traffic (spam), in this situation 551 > codes would be suitable. > A spammed address would be a case where 551 isn't suitable (or won't be for long). Do we really want it to be worth while to the spammers and phishers to learn to understand "Joe isn't here, he moved to the trailer down the road--go break his leg there"? --John -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
