Re: Question regarding VRFY

2018-03-01 Thread MRob
On 2018-03-01 08:14, John Fawcett wrote: On 01/03/18 05:09, J Doe wrote: Hi John, On Feb 27, 2018, at 3:25 PM, John Fawcett wrote: I can't think of a compelling reason either to enable VRFY or to disable it. Disabling it stops people abusing it, but then they can just

Re: Question regarding VRFY

2018-03-01 Thread John Fawcett
On 01/03/18 05:09, J Doe wrote: > Hi John, > >> On Feb 27, 2018, at 3:25 PM, John Fawcett wrote: >> I can't think of a compelling reason either to enable VRFY or to disable >> it. Disabling it stops people abusing it, but then they can just use >> RCPT TO to get the same

Re: Question regarding VRFY

2018-02-28 Thread J Doe
Hi John, > On Feb 27, 2018, at 3:25 PM, John Fawcett wrote: > I can't think of a compelling reason either to enable VRFY or to disable > it. Disabling it stops people abusing it, but then they can just use > RCPT TO to get the same information in most cases. I disabled it

Re: Question regarding VRFY

2018-02-27 Thread John Fawcett
On 27/02/18 20:36, J Doe wrote: > Hi, > > I read in both the Postfix man file (man 5 postconf), and the SMTP RFC > (5321), that VRFY can be disabled on a site-by-site basis. > > I disabled this on my server for port 25 but am wondering if I should leave > this enabled on my Postfix instance that

Question regarding VRFY

2018-02-27 Thread J Doe
Hi, I read in both the Postfix man file (man 5 postconf), and the SMTP RFC (5321), that VRFY can be disabled on a site-by-site basis. I disabled this on my server for port 25 but am wondering if I should leave this enabled on my Postfix instance that provides submission (587) ? I have