On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 08:28:36AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'd be inclined to make the user valid and have their .qmail just be
> a comment so that the bounces gets delivered to nowhere. Other than that you
> have to sit it out.
What I found has helped a lot in this situation are the "badrcptpatterns"
and "badrcptto" patch that are part of the spamcontrol patch available at
http://www.fehcom.de/qmail/qmail_en.html
That already blocks the address at SMTP level and the messages don't
have to go through the queue and the local delivery to get thrown away.
Also saves connection time with your SMTP servers so your tcpserver
slots don't get blocked long and have a higher turnaround time and it
saves a lot of bandwidth.
The bad thing about it is that it generates double bounces at the senders site.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | realize you haven't
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
