Steve, interesting. Your experience is different from mine.
I used 2 test email generators: Our webhost (linux based) uses pine, but I need to send mail from there to a virtual address on my SME box 'cos they also (as standard) host email for the hosted domain-name and can't / won't update their internal MX records to send mail for that domain to the my SME based mail server. I also used the email service at altavista.com. In both cases if I sent TO: CC: or BCC: to any [EMAIL PROTECTED] the mail got through. Valid domain names could be the primary name or any virtual domain. In both cases whenever I sent mail TO: CC: or BCC: to any [EMAIL PROTECTED] the mail bounced and a 551 error message is returned to the sending system. No message is generated on the SME system (sent to admin) about the bounced mail (that's as it should be). Having just looked at the 551 message, I would suggest a change to its wording: Remote host said: 551 Sorry %H (%I). I don't accept mail for %T. User does not exist. (Should the error number be different? What is the correct RFC?) Since this is a line generated by Mitel (not Darrell's code) it is probably their worry, and that line is also a catchall for other spam-relay attempts ... so either way is probably OK. I have set up my SME (recently) to reject mail for unknown users. Have you set your SME to reject mail to unknown users or forward to admin? I would STRONGLY recommend setting to reject. If you have set to forward, then Darrell's patch is of no use to you anyway. Hugh -- Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives by mail and http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
