Re: [exim] Re: Thanks for all your input

On Wed, 2004-09-22 at 10:48 +0100, Jon Kyme wrote:
> Peter Bowyer <peeebeee@???> wrote:
>
> >Bounces have null senders to avoid mail loops - if a bounce is
> >undeliverable, it is simply dropped. If it has a non-null sender then
> >the MTA responsible for the non-delivery of the bounce would have to
> >bounce the bounce.... much badness.
>
>
> Yes, but this doesn't apply in the case in question, on a number of counts:

You have no idea how many addresses 'dwmw2@???' is forwarded
to. If you send a bounce to dwmw2@???, in response to this
message. you have no idea how many places that bounce may go.

(Let us ignore for the purpose of this discussion the fact that the
reverse-path on this message isn't actually dwmw2@??? :)

--
dwmw2