On Mon, 19 May 2008, Alessandro Vesely wrote: > > > This kind of problem makes me think there's not much benefit to > > rejecting messages at SMTP time from trusted clients, whether they are > > MUAs or MTAs. > > Very much agreed! However, while SMTP AUTH clearly identifies trusted > MUAs, a "trusted MTA" is a somewhat fuzzy concept...
I mean a client MTA on the local network that's using my MTA as an outgoing relay. The client MTA is often running on a web server or is a departmental email server. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > The one exception that does arise is the occasional deeply broken MUA, > e.g., ones that fail to present any sort of useful error information to > the user. When such MUAs are prevalent (and there are placess where they > are - and again, just because you haven't encountered them doesn't mean > they don't exist) having the option to accept basically anything and > send a DSN later is useful. IME MUAs keep finding new ways of being deeply broken. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://dotat.at/ FITZROY: SOUTHERLY OR SOUTHEASTERLY 3 OR 4, BUT 5 OR 6 IN NORTHWEST. SLIGHT OR MODERATE, OCCASIONALLY ROUGH IN NORTHWEST. OCCASIONAL RAIN. MODERATE OR GOOD, OCCASIONALLY POOR LATER.
