Les Mikesell wrote: > On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 10:34, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: >> How is this a hostile to the relay? We aren't even accepting the >> mail. We are rejecting it before the conversation between the SMTP >> servers is finished. This email won't even hit your local queue. > > It's unlikely you are talking to the original sender. Assume a > forwarding relay has accepted a copy (as I am doing now), then > trying to deliver. If you give a 5xx smtp response you force the > sending relay to construct a bounce. But you know it's impossible > to deliver it.
Assumptions, assumptions. I am perfectly comfortable bouncing because... * I scan inbound mail only. Outbound mail is NOT scanned. * I scan on my MX hosts. I do NOT accept mail on any server under my control prior to scanning. However, if either of the preceding were false (as they are for Les,) there would be a very strong case against action_bounce indeed. action_discard would start to look very good, particularly if the outgoing queue was a bottleneck. -- Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902 Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com Software Engineer _______________________________________________ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
