[email protected] wrote: >> Let's look at another possible method: >> *snip*
or yet another... > It all seems to fall apart with the first presumption. I want to block a > specific single address. > ACK - but no real harm to block ALL 'noreply@' .. especially (per below) if you only have the one anyway.. None of them will find a place to land... > And yes it is unusual, it's a personal preference. In this case I get > several messages from the same source. All are identically formatted, > however a few of them do not include a proper from address, instead using > the [email protected]. Since most messages include the from address I will > just reply to it and go on my merry way, but if I miss the fact that I am > sending a message to noreply@ my message gets lost in the big blackhole, > no bounce, no auto response and I have no idea why this person is not > responding to my email. So I thought I would just go about bouncing it > locally to indicate I've screwed up. > > Since you have only the one 'issue' and a mixed situation where there IS a known correspondent that is (mostly) responsive, why not set your MUA, rather than Exim, to map that particular 'noreply@' to the known-good address as if it were a handle, abbreviation, or alias. Worst-case you might irritate that invididual/organization on something they really did NOT want to hear back on. But no more badly than if you had simply read the headers (perish *that* меньшинство thought...) and decided to compose a manual response anyway... HTH, Bill -- ## 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/
