Re: [Exim] Callout timeouts: opinions sought

Top Page

Reply to this message
Author: David Woodhouse
To: Alan J. Flavell
CC: Exim users list
Subject: Re: [Exim] Callout timeouts: opinions sought
On Thu, 2004-08-19 at 15:37 +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
> If they're less lucky, they'll get told:
> Status: 5.1.1 (bad destination mailbox address)
> Remote-MTA: dns;
> when in fact we told them:
> 550 Fraudulent sender address detected:
> (taken from an actual incident yesterday).

Hmmm. 5.1.1? What would they have seen if you'd implemented RFC2034 and

    550 5.1.8 Fraudulent sender address detected