On 18/01/17 21:50, Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
> Evgeniy Berdnikov <bd4@???> (Mi 18 Jan 2017 21:56:49 CET):
> …
>>> - I'll start with: you don't want it at RCPT or earlier
>>> because that will impact sender-verify callbacks.
>>
>> Exactly. Session with "MAIL FROM: <>" may be a sender verification
>> callback, so in this case we want to send clear 2xx responses to RCPTs
>> as client expects, suppressing 4xx codes from greylisting engine.
>> That's why greylisting is postponed until DATA command received.
>
> Ah. Got it. Thank you.
>
> Side note: we should have:
>
> --> MAIL FROM:<>
> <-- 250 OK
> --> VRFY foo@???
> <-- 250 OK foo@??? accepts mail from <>
> --> QUIT
>
> This would avoid all that clumsy sender-verification-de-impact
> hacks.
We don't at present. In effect, both VRFY and EXPN are dead (though
there is support for dealing with received ones).
--
Cheers,
Jeremy
