Hello,
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 01:15:21PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > You could for example deny at recipient time (recipients selectively)
> > instead of having only one deny/accept option after data.
>
>
> So you have one dumb MTA which accepts mail and then tries to forward it
> to a second, using XFORWARD, and the _second_ then has the option on
> rejecting individual recipients that the _first_ should have rejected in
> the first place? And the first then has to bounce them?
No, of course not.
> > But the most important point IMO is if callouts would send this
> > information via XFORWARD, because there currently is no way of
> > transfer such kind of data to MTA2 (as there is no data transferred).
>
> So you have one dumb MTA which does callouts to the second _before_
> accepting the mail?
>
> Either way, I'm not really sure why you'd do any of this.
This second scenario is the very typical situation to use callouts,
isn't it? At least if you are an ISP that has no control over the
second MTA and customers demanding a fallback MX...
The more information the second MTA can get about the original mail
the better.
--
Gruss / Best regards | LF.net GmbH | fon +49 711 90074-411
Matthias Waffenschmidt | Ruppmannstr. 27 | fax +49 711 90074-33
mw@??? | D-70565 Stuttgart | http://www.lf.net
