RE: [exim] a large number of domains fronted by Exim are ref…

Greg wrote:

> You don't seem to understand protocol design and implementation issues
> very well, especially where they touch upon error handling.

How did you come to that conclusion based on what I've said so far about
this issue? If you're having trouble seeing my point of view on this, I
agree that admins who are blocking bounces are doing something fairly
stupid. However, I don't agree with you that it should be the job of the
software they use to make that choice any more difficult than it currently
is (or isn't - meaning it could be very easy to do).

If you set up a mail server, and point a domain to it so that it gets email,
you've now made yourself an email administrator even if you have none of the
"required" skills to actually administrate such a system. As the email
administrator, it is your job to understand the requirements (RFCs). It is
also however your DISCRETION to completely ignore any and all of those
requirements and substitute your own if you want. It will obviously affect
how your system(s) accept email - but if you want it to do that, it should
be your choice. If those choices however are breaking other systems (that
others control) however, THEN we have a problem with the system that we're
using (that's communicating with the "broken" one). Fixes to prevent our
systems from being adversely affected by malconfigured systems is always a
good thing, but if I should ever want to block bounces, I would like to have
the ability to, and not have to jump through several hoops to accomplish it.

Simply put, your frustration is understood, but you're kicking the wrong
people.

PS, if you want support for any of your suggestions or whatever, you may get
further without the baseless insults and attacks.

Eli.