Renaud Allard wrote: > > 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. >> >>While we happen to be connected after a successful callout, we try a >>second RCPT with an address which is fairly sure to fail. 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). >> > > > That's indeed the purpose of the random callout: reduce load on some > remote servers. > Furthermore, if you blacklist an IP just because it sends _ONE_ mail to > a non existing user, you will rapidly end up blacklisting many people > who should not have been. And if your error message states this is > because the sender is not RFC compliant, while it in fact is, it is even > worse.
That probe was, in fact, NOT RFC compliant, and whether someone who has a server so configured 'should not have been' blacklisted doesn't seem to be at issue. 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/
