On 13/12/06, Dave Lugo <dlugo@???> wrote: > On Wed, 13 Dec 2006, Peter Bowyer wrote:
> > >
> > > So what happens when the remote server tries to do a verify on your verification.
> > > And fails, because it's return verify never found a valid 'mail from'...
> >
> > That's (one of the reasons) why sender verification is best done (if
> > at all) with a null sender - which is Exim's default.
> >
>
> Yeah - so it can break when confronted with BATV. :-/
>
> (I'm not a fan of sender verification, but if you do it, you need
> to be prepared to fallback to a non-null mail_from.)
Not sure I understand - if this breaks BATV, then so do bounces - I
know of some powerful arguments against sender verification, but I
didn't think this was one of them....
