On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 08:36:25PM +0100, Oliver von Bueren wrote: > WJCarpenter wrote: > > Some MUAs are sloppy and don't tell me who the bad recipient is when > > they get bad news after RCPT TO:. Thus, I don't know which of > > > For exactly that reason, I don't do any rejection at RCPT TO level for > MUAs. > > To implement this, you best use SMTP authentication on a submission port > for the MUAs and don't do any recipient verification during the SMTP > transaction. The sending user will then get a bounce message in case of > a wrong address, which lists the failed address in the message body. > That works with any MUA.
Yep, what he said. Essentially, for MUA submissions, don't reject at ACL time and instead let the routers generate a bounce instead. The only thing I would recommend, though, is sender address verification for MUA submissions from your local users. If it fails verification, use the /no_details option on the verify ACL to ensure a one-line response to the submitter. Outlook will tend to handle one-line responses during MAIL FROM properly. The main reason to verify the sender address is to ensure that a bounce will get back to the sender properly. Users sometimes misspell the From: header in their mail software, so rejecting immediately with something like "YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS IS MISCONFIGURED" for local users can be beneficial. -- Dean Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
