Ah.. Thanks for the clarification, I never knew that! :)

Sorry for the terse reply, rushed off my feet at work :(

Kind regards,

Darren


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David B Funk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 30 March 2004 15:35
> To: Darren Coleman
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: bounce "No such user"
> 
> 
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Darren Coleman wrote:
> 
> > The problem is, SA can only assess the spammyness of an 
> email AFTER the
> > headers have been received (i.e. From, To, etc) by which 
> point it would
> > be impossible to return a true 550 error.
> >
> > Daz
> 
> It would seem so but the SMTP protocol allows you to return any
> 5XX status code at any stage, so you are allowed to return a 550
> at the final 'DATA' ACK. You could argue the 'true'ness of that
> action but the protocol says that it should be honored.
> (Given that there's no honor among spammers, this is probably a
> pointless exercise anyway. ;(
> 
> This is easily do-able if you've got SA integrated into your MTA
> at the SMTP level such as sendmail + SA + milter
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dave Funk                                  University of Iowa
> <dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu>        College of Engineering
> 319/335-5751   FAX: 319/384-0549           1256 Seamans Center
> Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin            Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
> #include <std_disclaimer.h>
> Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{
> 

Reply via email to