Re: Hrmm, question on relay restrictions

[James Stevens]

Nod, it is proper .. Well to my thinking it is maybe my logic is messed up today.. <G> But RSS and RBL tests keep failiing it because it responds back to there test with 250 Ok .. Meaning it excepted the message. When I test out sendmail and Microsoft's SMTP services they all deny it and respond back with the No Relaying Aloowed response which is what I would like Qmail to do...   --JT ----- Original Message ----- From: Ihnen, David To: 'James Stevens' ; Qmail Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 2:16 PM Subject: RE: Hrmm, question on relay restrictions What part of a bounced message implies that it has been delivered?   Addressing something to somebody without an @ is just addressing it to the local system...   You addressed it with % (no @) and it was not delivered.  Sounds proper to me.   David -----Original Message----- From: James Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 2:17 PM To: Qmail Subject: Hrmm, question on relay restrictions I've been updating our relay rstriction security in tcpserv but while testing I noted that if I attempted to send a message to nobody%nobody.com (note the % instead of @) it actually acepts the message but bounces it back to me with a no local user error...   How do I make it to where it doesn't allow that type of addressing???   --JT