Re: [exim] sender callout mail_from change

On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 10:04 +0000, Peter Bowyer wrote:
> Correct. I think Marcus's suggestion of a non-null but
> reserved-for-the-purpose sender to use in callouts might work well,
> though. Force an 'accept' on it when you see it as a recipient, but
> reject after data if anything gets that far.
>
> Of course this is bending the orginal purpose of sender callouts -
> which is to find out, before accepting responsibility for a message,
> if we would be able to send a DSN back if we needed to.

indeed, and it will break sites using BATV, since
<localpart+cookie@domain>
is *only* valid as a recipient when the sender is <>. attempts to send
e-mail to such an address from a normal (ie. non-empty) address will be
rejected.

why would you use anything other than <> for sender callouts?

--
Kjetil T.