On Thu May 29 17:22:46 2008, Ned Freed wrote:
(1) is only appropriate if the MAIL FROM is emoty, NOTIFY=NEVER is
in effect,
the MAIL FROM Is somehow known to be forged. That leaves generating
a DSN as the only viable alternative in most cases.
As a brief aside - I agree with both Matthew's aims here and Ned's
conclusions - it did occur to me that a (possibly LMTP specific)
response code of some form which indicated both that the mail was
rejected as was strongly considered to be forged (or otherwise not
worthwhile to send a DSN for) might be a possibility, although not
for this document or even working group.
I suspect that using a 2xx in this case might be best, since it would
become a "discard", in effect, if the LMTP client didn't understand
it, and the additional bandwidth and processing for LMTP connections
is negligable. For SMTP, a 4xx might be more sensible, which would
reduce the bandwidth, but not generate a DSN instantly.
Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave(_at_)cridland(_dot_)net -
xmpp:dwd(_at_)dave(_dot_)cridland(_dot_)net
- acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
- http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade