On Sat, 25 Jun 2005, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> If you think blocking SMTP transactions simply because they arrive with
> an empty return path is the solution to any problem then you're using
> the wrong protocol from the get go.
Wait a minute. Let's step back a bit here. I don't think anybody ever
said that. You said, if I recall correctly, something to the effect
that "Exim should not be able to apply the test 'is the sender of this
message empty?'". I and other people are arguing against that
proposition.
What you do after passing that test is a different matter. As somebody
pointed out, one of the things you could do is "always accept, no matter
what".
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book
