On 16 Jul 2011, at 07:18, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Barry Warsaw writes:
>
>> Do you really think it needs to be configurable? I mean, if we
>> can't think of a reason to not make it 5xx, why not just wait for
>> the first wishlist bug report? :)
>
> No, on second thought after reviewing the codes, the only appropriate
> 5xx code is 550. So there's no reason I can think of for
> configurability at this point.
Sure, 550 is appropriate, but an rfc1893/2034 enhanced error code should be
used, too. These might be useful:
X.1.0 Other address status
X.1.6 Destination mailbox has moved, No forwarding address
X.2.1 Mailbox disabled, not accepting messages
Also, there's a case for customising the text returned, if not the error code.
--
Ian Eiloart
Postmaster, University of Sussex
+44 (0) 1273 87-3148
_______________________________________________
Mailman-Developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers
Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3
Searchable Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
