Re: [exim] Callout

Thomas Hochstein wrote:
> W B Hacker schrieb:
>
>>>> 2010-09-27 11:19:32 H=domain.com [123.123.123.123]:56505
>>>> I=[234.234.234]:25 sender verify fail for <sender@???>: response
>>>> to "MAIL FROM:<>" from a.mx.domain.com [217.153.18.125] was: 550 5.5.0
>>>> Sender domain is empty.
> [...]
>> If the text is correct, it didn't complain that the $local_part was empty.
>>
>> It said the sender *domain* was empty.
>
> That doesn't matter, does it? With an empty sender ("<>"), local part
> _and_ domain part of the sender are empty.

True. Of course.. ignore my comment.

>
>> That's either a misleading error message, or whole 'nuther issue.....
>
> I don't think so.
>
> -thh
>

ACK. What else *would* they say...

(also copying you 'direct', so we can see what OUR servers see ...)

I dont want to re-open the 'war' as to whether sender_verify callouts to any but
your own server pool are/are not a good idea, but HAVE tried them and found they
added significant pain for ZERO gain.

... in MY environment, anyway.

YMMV,

Bill