Re: [Exim] sender_verify_hosts and unresolvable domains

At 14:17 -0700 6/28/2001, Marc MERLIN wrote:
>BTW, note that I have often used this argument myself, but way too often
>I've heard back "you are the only site that's ever bounced my mail, so you
>must be some RFC nazy". Unfortunately, at least the first part is true: most
>mail servers to accept mail regardless of headers.

We are currently accepting such messages, but marking them with a local
header which users can filter against if they choose (and if they use a
sensible mail program). [We have a few other headers and an umbrella which
says "one or more of those others" for the brain-dead MUAs which don't
filter very well.] So far, our feedback is positive.

We also log them (in the new exim_spamlog), and I look through that now and
then and create exemptions for seeming white hat MTAs (like many of the
State of Washington servers...sigh). We're doing that with an lsearch (for
the moment) through a file keyed by IP (the value is unused by Exim...we
identify the server there for ease in human reading of the file).

We also found that our own billing department's new DSL line had faulty
name service and messages it sent were being marked (for a remarkably short
time ;-)).

--John