Re: [Exim] Re: Attachments and bounce messages

Philip Hazel wrote:
> A. Reduce the return_size_limit default to 10K.
>
> B. Implement bounce_return_body, and default it FALSE.
>
> C. It strikes me that "return_size_limit" is not a very helpful name any
> more. I propose to rename it as bounce_return_size_limit, but keep the
> old name as a deprecated synonym.
>

You've got my vote for all three changes. I see no reason whatsoever
to return messages bodies in bounce messages (not that my systems
generate bounces very often anyway :-)