On Wednesday 31 January 2007 10:43, Chris Lightfoot wrote: > you might hit a server that doesn't use cached results; > there might be machines that do sender verification with > random return paths or something else mad (probably rare). > if you use a null return-path then these cases can't > happen because there is nowhere the remote side can make a > verification callout to. in practice it may well usually > be safe to use non-null senders.
I thought we already established that you should yourself use a special return
path address for callout verification, and not perform any callout
verification when someone addresses it. Or you could always perform callout
verification at or after DATA.
--
Magnus Holmgren [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(No Cc of list mail needed, thanks)
"Exim is better at being younger, whereas sendmail is better for
Scrabble (50 point bonus for clearing your rack)" -- Dave Evans
pgpweZrf7Jzuj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- ## 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/
