On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 13:26, Juergen Edner wrote:
> Hello Nigel,
>
> > Would it not be easier to simply use the errors_copy functionality?
>
> thank you for reply. The error_copy function applies only
> to locally generated error messages not on incoming bounces.
> See
>
> http://www.exim.org/pipermail/exim-users/Week-of-Mon-19990412/011981.html
The router you originally posted will also only catch local bounces - in
fact it will do a less effective job since it misses bounces due to
conversations with remote SMTP boxes.
Which bounces are you trying to catch:-
1. bounces of a local user sending to an unknown local user
2. bounces of a local user sending to an unknown remote user
(unless this is 550-d in the SMTP then you are going to have to
do heuristics on incoming mail and intercept some based on that
- as I understand German law this would be *very* illegal)
3. bounces of a remote user sending to an unknown local user (need
to not verify in SMTP, accept and then bounce - which has bad
side effects with spam storms)
4. bounces of a remote user sending elsewhere
Your code did 1 & 3 (if there was no verify on SMTP reception).
errors_copy does 1, 2 (for messages bounced due to 550 in SMTP) & 3 (if
there was no verify on SMTP reception).
Frankly with EU data protection law as it is I would strongly advise you
*never* copy mail to postmaster unless you have good legal opinion
supporting the alternatives. You can get all the required detail for
diagnosis from the logs.
Nigel.
--
[ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@??? ]
[ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
