My way round the problem is to have a customised warning message on the
system that is subject to quotas. We have mailhubs which handle the SMTP
routing and mailservers which do the delivery to INBOXes so there is not
confusion about warnings for other reasons.
If it was all on one system then, I agreee, that being able to specify
context dependent warning messages would be a good thing.
John Linn
On Wed, 18 Oct
2000, Dave C. wrote:
>
> Does the not-technical sender really care about the exact semantics? My
> point was not that it was technically accurate, but that it was not
> cryptic.
>
> It may be not a technically exact description, but it is not a
> confusing description.
>
>
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, j.linn wrote:
>
> > "mailbox full" is not in fact aq corret description of the EXIM quota
> > failure.
> >
> > "INBOX currently too full for this message, try smaller one"
> >
> > is perhaps more accurate
> >
> > On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Dave C. wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > 'mailbox full' is cryptic???
> > >
> > > I mean, even extrapolating that to a post office box, 'mailbox full' is
> > > still pretty clear..
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > >
> > > > Philip Hazel rearranged electrons thusly:
> > > >
> > > > > The sender should get the normal warning message for delayed
> > > > > mail, as configured by delay_warning and delay_warning_condition. Is
> > > > > anything more needed?
> > > >
> > > > ... and that would normally carry the smtp error message mailbox full with the
> > > > 421 error. Unless he wants to amend that error to send something in plain
> > > > english rather than just a cryptic smtp error.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
>
>
>
