--
On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 04:16:13PM +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
|
| I'm confused about the interaction of callbacks with bounces that are
| directed to us.
|
| Yesterday it appears to me that aol.com were trying to send bounces
| to us, but we were refusing them on the grounds that there was no
| valid sender in the header lines.
Well, AOL is RFC I :
http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/tools/lookup.cgi?domain=aol.com
| We had callbacks enabled for aol.com, and I find if I try manually
| reproducing the effect of a callback to them I get
|
| ...
| rcpt to:<MAILER-DAEMON@???>
| 550 MAILBOX NOT FOUND
| Any comments to help me understand what's going on, please?
AOL claims that that address doesn't exist. If exim needs to bounce
the incoming message (for whatever reason), how can it do so?
| Should exim be verifying the sender of bounces via callback?
The sender of a bounce is supposed to be <> (the "NULL" sender).
Anything else isn't (really) a bounce message.
| Ought the other partner to refuse such a callback?
No. The callback should never be refused. The whole point of
callbacks is to refuse mail from sites who are badly misconfigured
(and shouldn't be necessary in the first place).
HTH,
-D
--
Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own
understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your
paths straight.
Proverbs 3:5-6
http://dman.ddts.net/~dman/
--
[ Content of type application/pgp-signature deleted ]
--
