On 29 Oct 2020, at 13:30, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
> On 29/10/2020 12:06, Wolfgang Breyha via Exim-users wrote:
>> On 29/10/2020 12:45, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
>>> On 29/10/2020 11:21, Niels Kobschätzki via Exim-users wrote:
>>>> I got a message from a user that our exim apparently sends a wrong
>>>> status
>>>> code on full mailboxes.
>>>>
>>>> Something like this:
>>>>
>>>> 550 Mailbox is full
>>>> 550 5.1.1 user@???… User unknown
>>>
>>> That's two separate responses. The client much have sent
>>> a subsequent SMTP command. Without knowing what that was
>>> it's hard to comment.
>>
>> Some MTAs interpret the "missing" enhanced status code from exim and
>> set a
>> default (eg. sendmail, exchange IIRC). So every 550 without x.y.z
>> gets a
>> "user unknown" or something odd then.
>
> That would be... out of spec.
>
> It's perfectly reasonable for a server (eg. Exim) to support ESMTP
> and not support ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES (RFC 2034). A client talking
> to such a server should not be inventing such codes out of thin air.
