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; othello.physics.gla.ac.uk
>
> 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
responded:

    550 5.1.8 Fraudulent sender address detected

--
dwmw2