On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 09:34 +0100, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> So, I'm confused.  Surely the avoidance of loops always requires
> callout to use a null sender, and postmaster and header-sender
> callouts are in contravention of that?   I'd say that the warning is
> *always* appropriate.  Your "doesn't trigger callouts of its own" is
> not under your control; it's the remote end which might be deciding to
> make yet another callout.

I mean an address like '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' which,
if you received a probe for that address, would not cause _further_
callouts.

To do a header_sender callout with a null sender is broken, as Steve B
discovered. The RFC2822 sender address may never be used as an RFC2821
sender, and may reject all bounces.

-- 
dwmw2



-- 
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users 
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/

Reply via email to