> > 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... > > > 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* > менÑÑинÑÑво thought...) and decided to compose a manual > response anyway... > > HTH, > > Bill >
I'd rather not block all noreply@ as it seems like overkill and who knows what I might break. Also, rewriting the inbound mail is impossible as I don't know the proper destination when it is missing. -- ## 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/
