Marc Sherman wrote:
Jeroen van Aart wrote:"Bounces should only be sent if the receiver knows they'll be "usefully delivered." This is code for: Don't sent bounces when your system rejects spam or virus traffic, or you'll become an Internet pariah." That sounds nice in theory. But how can you ever in a sane manner determine with reasonable certainty a bounce will be usefully delivered? If you try to make this work it makes it also more likely legitimate bounces will not be sent out. Which in turns conflicts with: "Silently discarding messages is not prohibited, but it is strongly discouraged." Or am I missing something totally obvious?Yes. It means, "reject spam at SMTP time, not by accepting and bouncing. Only accept messages at SMTP time that you believe you can successfully deliver."
Hmm, yes, but that's like before, an interpretation on how you think the RFC means.
Honestly I think this RFC still has too much MAY or SHOULD and not enough MUST. This will lead to problems like before.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- ## 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/
