On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:14:01PM +0200, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
> Evgeniy Berdnikov <[email protected]> (Di 12 Apr 2016 13:37:37 CEST):
> > acl_check_data:
> > 
> >   # Deny if the message contains an overlong line.  Per the standards
> >   # we should never receive one such via SMTP.
> >   #
> >   deny    condition  = ${if > {$max_received_linelength}{998}}
> > 
> >  "References:", 2. in my configuration bounces are sent through the same
> >  mail relay and are blocked by this rule, because they include headers
> >  of the original mail with oversized lines. So bounces are lost and
> >  my users have no hints that their mails were dropped.
> 
> With the above configuration it's not your system sending the bounces!
> So it's not your problem, but the senders problem, isn't it?

 Yes, but... I have a chain of two "types" of SMTP servers inside office,
 with different roles:

 SMTP clients --> SMTP(A) --> SMTP(B) --> LMTP (mailboxes)

 Servers B were upgraded to Exim-4.87, severs A were not. Currently
 if B rejects mail, bounce is generated on A, but A can not deliver it
 directly to mailbox (it has no mappings "address->mbox"), it should
 forward bounce through B. If bounce is rejected by B on the same reason,
 it simply disappears.

 Well, I can push the rejection edge towards SMTP client, rejecting
 malformed mails on A. But problem was that after a "blind" upgrade
 of servers B to Exim-4.87 I suddenly got RT tickets about lost mails.
 If new exim acquire some new restrictions, the same situation could
 happen again. I consider this situation as a problem of interoperability.
 IMHO, the best solution today is to accept and pass all bounces.
-- 
 Eugene Berdnikov

-- 
## List details at https://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/

Reply via email to