On Tue, February 26, 2008 4:38 pm, Brent Spencer wrote: > Stephen, > > Seems that using a dated address at all isn't recommended as you don't > know whether the remote SMTP server will be using SAV or not. That would > mean that the proper handling of bounces as shown below would no longer > work. > > # Catch-all rule for addresses that are not yet on the whitelist. > # Use a dated envelope (to catch bounces), a dated Reply-To for safe > # measure, and also append the recipient's address to the whitelist. > #to-file ~/.tmda/whitelist bare > to * tag envelope dated=10d reply-to dated from bare=append
I've never actually had problems with somebody denying my dated addresses due to SAV, that I know of. That said, I think the way postfix (which I use) handles address validation, extensions are ignored, so my server does actually allow a remote SMTP server using SAV to work correctly... Thinking about it, the same should be true of any SMTP server where the server itself supports address extensions. What SMTP server are you running? _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([email protected]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
