On Wednesday 31 January 2007 10:43, Chris Lightfoot wrote:
> you might hit a server that doesn't use cached results;
> there might be machines that do sender verification with
> random return paths or something else mad (probably rare).
> if you use a null return-path then these cases can't
> happen because there is nowhere the remote side can make a
> verification callout to. in practice it may well usually
> be safe to use non-null senders.
I thought we already established that you should yourself use a special return
path address for callout verification, and not perform any callout
verification when someone addresses it. Or you could always perform callout
verification at or after DATA.
--
Magnus Holmgren holmgren@???
(No Cc of list mail needed, thanks)
"Exim is better at being younger, whereas sendmail is better for
Scrabble (50 point bonus for clearing your rack)" -- Dave Evans
