On 2006-03-30, Peter Bowyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 30/03/06, Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 2006-03-30, Nigel Wade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > That only works for mis-configured MTAs. A properly configured MTA would >> > reject >> > a message destined for a non-existent recipient. It would not accept it >> > and then >> > generate a bounce message. >> >> But when MTA(n) rejects a message that MTA(n-1) is trying to relay, >> MTA(n-1) has to bounce it, right? > > MTA(n-1) shouldn't accept messages to invalid recipients in the first > place. If it has no direct knowledge of valid recipients, it should do > callouts.
I understood those weren't reliable because (there may be other reasons?) in many cases MTA(n) is configured not to give out that information because spammers could use it. -- ## 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/
