Re: [Exim] Urgent problem: Blanket rejection problem on upgr…

On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 12:25:57PM +0100, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> If on the other hand, you're checking a recipient, then you're checking
> that the recipient will receive mail from this sender, so you *SHOULD*
> use the address you were given and not <>.

Well, that might be a nice extra feature but it is quite clearly not how
Exim callout verification is intended to work.

> There are legitimate reasons
> for not accepting bounces to addresses that exist (ie. they should never
> send mail, eg lists and forwarding-expanders etc).

You are not doing yourself any credit, here. How can you reject "MAIL
FROM <>" based on the recipient, when you haven't had the bloody
recipient yet? If somebody rejects a "MAIL FROM: <>", "RCPT TO: XXX"
pair, I don't care. The point is that they should never reject the
"MAIL FROM: <>" line. Please read carefully and think.

Once again, with subtitles for the hard of thinking: Exim has changed
its behaviour to pass on the original sender in the MAIL verb. This is
clearly a bug. If the recipient server rejects the sender, Exim treats
the server as broken and blackists it entirely, because it thinks it
used '<>' as a sender. It is wrong and wrongfully blacklisting a
perfectly functioning mail system.

--
Bruce

I unfortunately do not know how to turn cheese into gold.