Henning Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> there was a discussion on the main qmail list recently if messages with
> an empty envelope sender may contain more than one recipient. We agreed
> they may not. Charles Cazabon wrote a small patch implementing this
> restriction.
[...]
> +void err_badbounce() { out("553 sorry, I don't accept bounce messages with more
>than 1 recipient. Go read RFC 2821. (#5.7.1)\r\n"); }
When I was writing the patch for vanilla qmail, I spent half an hour
with RFC2821 to see which status value was the most appropriate for this
error. RFC2821 section 4.2.2 defines 550 having a meaning (among
others) of "Requested action not taken ... command rejected for policy
reasons", whereas 553 is "... mailbox name not allowed (e.g. mailbox
syntax incorrect)".
I ruled out 553 on the basis that syntactically-incorrect mailbox names
would be rejected at the RCPT TO: stage by other code in qmail-smtpd;
therefore, any mailbox name would have been accepted as the first
recipient -- it seems bogus to claim syntax error simply because the
mailbox was given as the second recipient.
It seems to me that "policy based error" is a much better description of
what the patch is actually doing, and used 550 as a result.
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
