On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:50:03 +0000, Ian Eiloart <iane@???>
wrote:
>--On March 18, 2005 08:06:26 +0100 Marc Haber <mh+exim-users@???>
>wrote:
>> Third: I suspect that you want to reject messages with a <> envelope
>> sender, which is an extremely stupid idea. If you need to google for
>> the reasons, you shouldn't be running a public mail server.
>
>Well, it's a bad thing to do. It's not a stupid idea, it's an obvious idea
>when you're getting a lot of spam blowback.
And when you spend two seconds on google, you'll find out that it is a
stupid thing to do, and a lot of admins don't know the implications of
what they're doing.
>Remember, questions are the
>beginning of wisdom, Marc, and questions spring from ideas.
Yes, but that doesn't ease the requirement of doing basic research
before requesting people to invest time for answering questions.
>Implementing it without understanding the implications would be a stupid
>thing to do, though.
Which is what I meant.
>The implications:
>
> 1. your users can't get bounce messages when their email is
>misaddressed, or can't be delivered.
> 2. they can't get vacation messages warning that the recipient isn't
>available.
> 3. they can't send email to sites that check the validity of the sender
>address with verification callouts.
4. Will get the domain in question blacklisted in a minute.
Greetings
Marc
--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
