Jeff Makey <[email protected]> wrote: >>Has anybody used mimedefang in additional "reject after body but mark >>and deliver too"? > > The best way I found to do this is to have the milter send a copy of > the marked message via a new sendmail subprocess, then reject as usual > in the milter.
Thanks for the suggestion [option zero]. > Rejecting and delivering is a blatant violation of the RFCs, but it > can be useful for suspected spam. Delivering (to separate folder) solely for purpose of "reporting as spam" (if the recipients decides to spend some time to take a look and confirm) is quite unlike "standard delivery" (IMHO). It would break the letter but not the spirit (IMHO). -- [pl>en: Andrew] Andrzej Adam Filip : [email protected] : [email protected] You get what you pay for. -- Gabriel Biel _______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
