On 31/03/06, Jeremy Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter Bowyer wrote: > > On 30/03/06, Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>I'm thinking of MTA(n-1) as a department's outgoinggmailhub or ISP's > >>smarthost. It's usually configured to accept anything from within the > >>IP range it's supposed to cover, > > That part it what it shouldn't do. By all means reject anything not > from that trusted IP range, but also do recipient verify callout > and reject anything that fails. > > >> and use DNS MX to pick MTA(n) for > >>non-local recipients. > >> > >>That's the sort of situation in which I was under the impression that > >>MTA(n-1) would often be unable to get the recipient-verify callout > >>information. Have I got this wrong? > > I don't see why "unable". Could you expand? > > > > You're right, it wouldn't use callouts. > > I disagree. It should.
We're talking about an outbound relay sending to arbitrary destinations, with verified senders. Callouts are a waste of time, because it can deliver a bounce to the known sender if it's unable to deliver a message. Peter -- Peter Bowyer Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ## 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/
