On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
> I think that the question was to inform the recipients, not the sender,
> who will get an appropriately generated bounce. It appears that the
> management want mail that says something like
>
> "Someone tried to send you mail, but it didn't get through because the
> sender probably thinks that MS-Word or PowerPoint are reasonable
> document exchange formats. Now do you really want to be getting mail
> from such idiots anyway?"
Ah. I had misunderstood that. Sven's later message pointing out that the
limit is on a transport also makes it clear that this is indeed what is
wanted.
I don't think there is any way to do this at present. On the Wish List
is the following item:
(93) 04-May-1999 L fallback_transport
This would be a generic transport option, specifying a different transport to
be used if the first one failed. Failed hard, or failed soft? Or an option?
If I ever implement it, it could be used for this kind of thing by
falling back to an autoreply transport.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
