David Woodhouse wrote: > On Wed, 2006-10-18 at 18:43 +0800, W B Hacker wrote: > >>As we have no such user as: >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>This was neither.... > > > That's done in order to reduce the load on the server we call out to.
Works very well, too! The LBL rejection it eventually sets up (not always right away) is a very liteweight process, and thereafter we get *zero* load on the mailstore. > > While we happen to be connected after a successful callout, we try a > second RCPT with an address which is fairly sure to fail. and which RFC and paragraph defines how *those* SHOULD / MUST be responded to? > If _that_ is > accepted, we assume that the server in question will accept _all_ > callouts, so we don't bother to make any more (at least until the cache > expires). > Bill -- ## 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/
